Two proposals are being pushed by Republican state lawmakers that would make it harder for medical marijuana patients to access their medication.

Both want to amend the Arizona Medical Marijuana Act to limit which types of doctors can issue referrals for medical weed, establish stricter restrictions on who can get those referrals, and require patients to get new referrals more often, according The Associated Press (the article was originally posted on KJZZ'.org).

Rep. Kelly Townsend, R-Mesa, introduced House Bill 2061, which would remove pregnant women from the list of patients who qualify for medical weed. But she'll most likely need three-fourths of votes in the state House and Senate to amend the law, because the Medical Marijuana Act is a voter-approved initiative, AP says.

The proposal by Rep. Jay Lawrence, R-Scottsdale, would remove physicians who practice alternative medicine like naturopathy and homeopathy from the list of doctors who can issue medical marijuana referrals, "leaving only doctors of medicine and osteopathy," AP says.

It also would set requirements that qualifying patients acquire a new referral every six months, instead of once a year like they do now.

Figures from July 2015 say that more than 87 percent of medical marijuana referrals come from naturopaths and homeopaths, according to a report by the Arizona Department of Health Services.

Lawrence introduced his measure as a bill and as a House Concurrent Resolution, meaning it would only become law if enacted by the voters. That way, HCR 2019 can become law without needing three-fourths of the votes in both houses to pass in the Legislature.

J.P. Holyoak, president of the Arizona Dispensary Association told the AP that he questions the legality of the bills. Also, he says, the state's medical marijuana industry has proven to be successful, and new laws trying to cripple it are "unnecessary and counterproductive."

"It's disappointing to see some legislators are trying to roll back a voter-approved law that is helping tens of thousands of seriously ill Arizonans," Holyoak told the AP in an email. "Our state should focus on moving forward, not backward."

As of December, roughly 88,000 people in Arizona are registered medical marijuana patients, the AP says.

In a few months, we will find out whether any of the initiatives to legalize recreational marijuana proposed by several different groups—including the Marijuana Policy Project and Arizonans for Mindful Regulation—will be up for vote this November. 

If  MPP's measure is the one to make it through, marijuana sales could raise at least $40 million in revenue annually to go toward funding education.

Arizona's Superintendent of Public Instruction Diane Douglas completely opposes legalizing weed, and she doesn't give a shit about the possible economic benefits on both education and healthcare that would come from taxing marijuana sales at 15 percent (per MPP's initiative).

Douglas issued this statement:

By using drug money to educate our children, regardless of the drug we choose, we’re creating a world where we’re funding our schools by betting against the people graduating from them, and I cannot morally support that stance. How can we tell our kids, in one breath, not to do drugs, and in the next, tell them that drugs bought their health textbooks? How do we maintain the authority to tell them not to deal drugs when the state of Arizona is running a cartel?

There is also the potential for government abuse when we create a revenue incentive for the state to increase drug consumption in our communities. I agree with legislative leadership, including House Education Chairman Paul Boyer, that maintaining a drug-free school system is a cornerstone to creating a bright future for our students.

All Arizona children deserve a great education. I believe we need a system that is based on what is best for all of our children. When we look for ways to fund that system, we must not be tempted by potential profits from evil drugs like marijuana. We owe it to our children to find a more responsible way to ensure our schools have the resources they need to succeed.

Initiatives have until July 1 to gather more than 150,000 signatures to land on the ballot.

Now that Kalvin Catlin's brother Kyle has been convicted on three felony drug charges, the 23-year-old doesn't have much hope about the outcome of the trial the two will tackle together in December. 

The husband and father of two—a daughter who will turn 3 years old in December, and a son who will be 1 next month—says he's been trying to hide from the legal hell. Now that his brother sits in jail while he awaits for sentencing, all of the feelings are reemerging. 

"It is devastating," he says, wiping the tears from his face with paint-stained, white T-shirt. "I just lost my brother. It is unspeakable. To know that one day my entire life is going to (change)...everything I have been working so hard for."

If it weren't for the upcoming trial, Kalvin would be well on his way to a very successful career racing cars. His hobby and family have kept him happily distracted. But in two months, he'll have to walk into Pima County Superior Court Judge Javier Chon-Lopez's courtroom and pray for the best.

Three years ago, the brothers—both of whom are medical marijuana cardholders—partnered up in a caregiver project called Arizona Medical Marijuana Caregivers. They were arrested in late 2012, a few months after Kyle was arrested on separate counts. The brothers' residence was searched, after investigators overseeing the case found recent information about the healing center online. That's how they justified another search warrant. (It was a site with tons of reviews about the weed Catlin sold and his services, as well as customer testimonials, Kyle told the Tucson Weekly in September.)

Some of the felonies the brothers face are: Illegally conducting an enterprise; conspiracy to commit sale of marijuana; conspiracy to commit possession of marijuana for sale; possession of marijuana for sale; possession of drug paraphernalia. 

The indictment refers to Kyle as the "Boss," who employed an "associate" to deliver marijuana, and "arranged appointments between the runner and customer for the purpose of selling marijuana." While Kalvin, "could facilitate and/or arrange appointments and meetings between the runners and the customers for the purpose of selling marijuana and/or cannabis."

"Kyle and/or Kalvin would maintain a secure residence(s) and/or phone lines to further the goals of the enterprise. Such residence(s) would be used as a base of operations to 1. Secure cash and/or proceeds of the enterprise; 2. Store marijuana and/or cannabis for purpose of sale; 3. Store and use equipment for the purpose of manufacturing cannabis; 4. Manufacturing cannabis; 5. Packaging and inventorying amounts of marijuana and or/cannabis that would be sold by the enterprise, and; 6. Provide a clandestine and secure location to conduct the affairs of the enterprise," the indictment says. 

Kyle and Kalvin's attorneys are going to work together to come up with a defense. Unfortunately, if Chon-Lopez heads the same route he did in Kyle's first trial, they probably won't be able to mention the Arizona Medical Marijuana Act as part of that defense. 

In Kyle's case, he's already been convicted on three felonies, which means that if he is convicted in trial 2, the sentence will only double. 

Medical marijuana laws aside, this is a time when President Obama, his administration and bipartisan members of Congress are asking for sentencing reform on nonviolent drug offenders. Earlier this month, the U.S. Department of Justice released 6,000 of them. 

Kyle Catlin's family and friends have a lot of questions about the way his trial rolled out last week.

The biggest of them all: Why was Arizona's medical marijuana law pretty much ignored during most of the trial? Kyle's father, Marvin Catlin, is certain that if the defense would have been able to explain the statute, and how it pertained to Kyle's case, the jury wouldn't have convicted him on three felony drug charges. The 27-year-old is a medical marijuana patient and certified caregiver.

On Monday morning, Marvin watched the eight jurors read their unanimous decision, finding Kyle guilty of possessing marijuana for sale; attempting to produce marijuana; and possessing drug paraphernalia. Three felonies that could total two decades in prison if given the maximum. 

Within 10 minutes, Kyle was taken into custody. He'll likely remain in jail until his sentencing hearing, which is scheduled for the beginning of December. His attorney, Brick Storts, wants him out on bail, but who knows. 

Marvin stepped out of courtroom #478 that morning to call his wife. The mother of four wasn't able to get the day off work, and had to hear the news over the phone. 

"(The jury) allowed for the law to be violated...ruined someone's life...put a perfectly fine man who harms no one (in jail)," Marvin says. "My wife is devastated. She is going to have a tough time."

A Glimpse into Trial for Case 1

(To freshen up your memory on details of Kyle's situation, read the story I wrote in September about his two cases.)

Last Tuesday after selecting the jury for Kyle's trial, Pima County Superior Court Judge Javier Chon-Lopez dictated that no one was allowed to research the Arizona Medical Marijuana Act (passed by voters in 2010), according to Storts. The defense couldn't ask witnesses questions related to the law, and the only times Storts was able to briefly mention the AMMA was during his opening and closing statements.

The only guideline explained was that an MMJ cardholder can possess up to 2.5 ounces of weed. Also, any word on Kyle's advocacy work with the group National Organization for the Reform of Marijuana Laws was prohibited.

At the end, Storts had no option but to rely on "beyond a reasonable doubt." When he directed the jury on the last day of trial, he said the state had failed to prove Kyle's guilt—that all the conclusions reached were unfounded assumptions.

First, there was the testimony by a young man—not a medical marijuana cardholder—who allegedly got weed from Kyle. Storts reminded the jury that the young man never confirmed he had gotten the marijuana from Kyle. (The man in question was reportedly seen leaving the apartment complex where Kyle consulted with other medical marijuana patients.) Prosecutor John Edgett, deputy county attorney at the Pima County Attorney's Office, argued it wasn't necessary to hear it from the young man's mouth—the circumstantial evidence pointed to Kyle selling him weed.

"(The young man) told me that he remembered everything except for things that implicated this defendant. You (jury) can understand why he doesn't want to get someone he is acquainted with in trouble," Edgett said in his closing statement. 

(This young man's arrest was what backed up law enforcement agents' surveillance of Kyle, and the warrants to search both Kyle's place of business near Grant Road and First Avenue, and residency near Fourth Avenue, where they ended up finding 147 marijuana plants.)

Then, there was the assumption that Kyle sold marijuana to other cardholders. Storts told the jury that Kyle's caregiver business—Arizona Medical Marijuana  Caregivers—was based on donations only. Again, the state did not prove beyond a reasonable doubt that Kyle "sold" marijuana to multiple MMJ patients, Storts' closing statement said.

About the marijuana production, the state's attorney repeatedly said Kyle couldn't grow marijuana, when the AMMA very clearly states that a patient can grow up to 12 plants in an "enclosed, locked facility."

Kyle did not testify in his trial.

Strange Occurrence
Kyle faced a fourth charge that was later dropped: possession of a deadly weapon during the commission of a felony charge.

Still, Edgett did not remove two photos of Kyle's shotgun from the evidence slideshow. The jury possibly saw the photos while Edgett scrolled through the slideshow, according to Kyle and his father, who said he saw the photos appear on the screen for a few seconds.

Edgett admitted that the photos were still in his iPad, and that if they had indeed appeared on the screen, A. He did not do it on purpose, and B. The photos couldn't have been on the screen for longer than a split second. Storts asked for a mistrial based on that mistake, but Chon-Lopez denied it, saying he hadn't seen the photos on the screen either. 

Kyle's father told the Weekly that he's almost positive the shotgun photos had a very negative effect on the jury—that the moment they saw those photos (if they saw them), even though the charge was dropped, the image of Kyle as a violent drug dealer remained in their minds. 

What the Defense Could Have Looked Like
(From the article, In Defense of Marijuana):

The MMJ Act was approved by voters in 2010, but it took two years for dispensaries to pop up. Qualifying patients were left with the options to either cultivate their medicine (the law allows for 12 plants per patient), or find so-called "compassion clubs" of independent medical weed dealers that could provide them with their medicine.

At the time, Catlin knew a few people who needed both help and a space to grow. After getting his MMJ card for chronic pain, Catlin went through the process of also becoming a medical marijuana caregiver. By law, caregivers can purchase, transport and grow medical cannabis in limited quantities for up to five patients, as long as they are registered with the state, comply with the MMJ law and pay taxes, according to the Arizona Medical Cannabis Association.

The medical marijuana law has a section called Affirmative Defense, which pretty much means that if you prove the marijuana possession, use, cultivation etc., falls within medical boundaries—and as long as you follow other guidelines, such as being in possession of the legal amount of weed, or growing marijuana in a "contained, enclosed facility"—all or some charges can be dropped.

That's what Catlin hoped to prove in trial 1. 

A paragraph of the medical marijuana law reads, "The qualifying patient and the qualifying patient's designated caregiver were engaged in the acquisition, possession, cultivation, manufacture, use or transportation of marijuana, paraphernalia or both, relating to the administration of marijuana solely to treat or alleviate the qualifying patient's medical debilitating condition ... or (its) symptoms ..."

Catlin told the Weekly the weed, the cultivation, the paraphernalia were all for his and the other patients' medicinal purposes.

In a defense letter he wrote to the court, Catlin said that his acquisition, possession, cultivation, manufacturing, transportation and marijuana paraphernalia were there to treat, alleviate "mine and other qualifying patient's debilitating medical conditions or symptoms associated ..." Also, he had a system where everyone got carded, and he made sure no one got more than 2.5 ounces of weed every 14 days.

He argued, as a patient he has the right to grow 12 plants, so he did. The rest belonged to the other 15 patients. He said that several of his lawyers have asked him to hand over the names of those 15 people, so that at least the 147 marijuana plants aren't all tagged with his name. But Catlin wasn't willing, unless he was promised those people won't get charged with anything. But, he says, if the prosecutors wanted to get a hold of them that bad, their names and contact information are in his computer, which they confiscated at the time of his arrest.

Then there's the amount of weed he's being charged with, which he said is inaccurate because prosecutors are counting stems, leaves, and other un-useable parts of the plant. Useable marijuana is the flower that's been dried out.

(During the trial, one of the law enforcement officers who arrested Kyle confirmed that he hadn't done a test to verify whether the marijuana was useable or not. He said it looked useable.)

A Reminder of Arizona v. Matlock
(From In Defense of Marijuana):

In May of this year, the Arizona Court of Appeals Division Two overturned a ruling from July 2014 by Pima County Superior Court Judge Richard Fields, which stated that medical marijuana patients are allowed to provide each other with weed, per the state's medical marijuana law.

Back when he issued the ruling, Fields said a section of the marijuana law says patients can't be prosecuted for providing each other with weed, as long as "nothing of value" is exchanged in return. Another section says that a patient's card can be revoked if the patient gives a non-cardholder weed, which he interpreted as, cardholders can provide marijuana to other cardholders. He also argued that the 59-word provision contained no commas, so under state law that meant the section was ambiguous, and could be interpreted in several ways. When a law, or portion of a law, is ambiguous, the court must be lenient with the defendant. Basically, the wording was so confusing, a person couldn't know if he or she was breaking the law, if he indeed broke it.

The Fields ruling helped dismiss a case against Tucson resident Jeremy Allen Matlock, who was caught placing ads on Craigslist offering medical marijuana in exchange for a small donation of $25 per plant.

The Court of Appeals said allowing patient-to-patient transactions would green light sale enterprises. Their decision also came down to a different interpretation of the wording (and the grammar), similar to what Fields cited in his ruling.

With the Fields case overturned, Matlock is facing prosecution again. An appeal to the Arizona Supreme Court is pending.

Storts said in September that if the Arizona Supreme Court overturned the Appeals Court's decision, then Kyle could have had "a really good chance." Either way, since the medical marijuana law couldn't be used in trial, this case was also useless. Storts, Kyle's family and friends hoped for a jury nullification, which means, "OK folks, he did it but this law is ridiculous and you don't want to sentence anybody to prison for a long time," Storts said.

"The problem with some law enforcement is that they don't really know the (medical marijuana) law," Catlin told the Tucson Weekly in September. "People get arrested and they leave it up for the courts to figure out. The law was made so that no more people got arrested. (The state) is trying to undermine the medical marijuana system."

Case 2
The trial for case 2 begins in mid-December. Both Kyle, and his younger brother Kalvin Catlin—also a medical marijuana cardholder—face several drug felonies.

(I had a conversation with Kalvin after Kyle's trial ended. Stay tuned for a write-up on that tomorrow.)

The marijuana industry is beginning to show more respect for women. By that, the publication Marijuana Business Daily means less wet T-shirt contests at medical marijuana dispensaries, as well as fewer ads of half-naked women with bongs, and more, way more, top executive positions in the weed economy. 

A recent survey by the magazine says that women now make a "sizable and growing" portion of high ranks in the industry, including 63 percent of high-level positions at testing labs; 48 percent of executive spots in processing and infused product manufacturing, where women make up 48 percent of "key decision-making" positions like being the owner, CEO and/or president.

"While years ago it was rare to see women in executive roles on the retail side of the industry, they now fill 38 percent of those positions at dispensaries and recreational stores."

All-in-all, women hold 36 percent of leadership positions in the entire industry, which is noticeably higher than the 22 percent lead positions in U.S. companies in general, according to 2014 figures from the Pew Research Center, the Marijuana Business Daily article by Becky Olson says. 

Other sectors, such as wholesale and investment, have fewer women in exec positions, but those numbers are still higher than the average for all U.S. businesses, Olson writes. 

History was made in Colorado, guys: Tax revenue from marijuana sales was higher than revenue brought in by alcohol. 

The state raised about $70 million from weed in fiscal year 2014-2015, compared to the less than $42 million from alcohol sales, according to the Marijuana Policy Project. Last Wednesday, Colorado celebrated a "marijuana tax holiday," where the state suspended marijuana sales for a day. And I guess it was a well deserved break. 

“Marijuana taxes have been incredibly productive over the past year, so this tax holiday is a much-deserved day off,” said Mason Tvert, director of communications for the Marijuana Policy Project, and a co-director of the campaign in support of the 2012 initiative to regulate and tax marijuana like alcohol in Colorado. A similar measure in Arizona is currently gathering signatures to make the ballot for next year's general election. “This will be the one day out of the year when the state won’t generate significant revenue. Over the other 364 days, it will bring in tens of millions of dollars that will be reinvested in our state.”

Tvert  said it's crazy to think the state missed out on so much money when it suppressed marijuana into the black market. "It's even crazier that so many states are still doing it. Tax revenue is just one of many good reasons to replace marijuana prohibition with a system of regulation."

The nearly $70 million include: $43,938,721 from a 10 percent special sales tax on retail marijuana sales to adults; $25,959,338 from a 15 percent excise tax on wholesale transfers of marijuana intended for adult use. Alcohol-wise: $27,309,606 from excise taxes collected on spirited liquors; $8,881,349 from excise taxes on beer; and $5,646,692 from excise taxes collected on vinous liquors. These figures do not include standard state sales taxes or any local taxes, MPP said.

The Arizona initiative MPP is pushing would allow adults 21 and older to possess limited amounts of weed; cultivate six plants per person or 12 total in a household; establish 15 percent tax on retail marijuana sales, with much of the revenue going toward Arizona schools and public education programs, among other guidelines. MPP recently said they expect to see at least $40 million annually invested in education thanks to the revenue. 

Things are looking good in the legal weed world, at least for the ballot measure being pushed by the Marijuana Policy Project, which has already gathered more than 75,000 signatures. They are one-third of the way into their goal of at least 230,000, according to an MPP press release. 

Their initiative—called the Campaign to Regulate Marijuana Like Alcohol—only needs 150,000 sigs to make the ballot. But MPP has said they will hand the Secretary of  State's Office a decent amount more, in case there are issues of invalid signatures. MPP launched its petition drive back in May, and within a few weeks they already had 25,000 signatures and more than $300,000 raised. 

“We’re finding that more than one out of every two registered voters we ask to sign is happy to do it, so that’s a good sign,” said campaign chairman J.P. Holyoak in the press release. “People recognize that marijuana prohibition has been just as big of a mess as alcohol prohibition was 80 years ago. It’s time for a more sensible approach.”

The proposed initiative would allow adults 21 and older to possess limited amounts of weed; cultivate six plants per person or 12 total in a household; establish 15 percent tax on retail marijuana sales, with much of the revenue going toward Arizona schools and public education programs, among other guidelines. MPP recently said they expect to see at least $40 million annually invested in education thanks to the revenue. (Opponents don't care about how much money this could bring to education. They argue the harm would be greater than the millions. Read more, here.

“Most voters seem to recognize that marijuana is less harmful than alcohol and that we’d be better off if we started treating it that way,” Holyoak said in the statement. “It makes little sense to criminalize adults for choosing to use a product that is safer than one you can currently buy in a grocery store. Regulating and taxing marijuana like alcohol just makes sense.”

Ray Stern of Phoenix New Times takes a deep dive into the opposing forces pushing initiatives to legalize marijuana in Arizona. He notes that one of the groups, Arizonans for Mindful Regulation, is vowing to work to defeat the Marijuana Policy Project's proposition if it makes the ballot:

Yet one of legalization’s biggest challenges is in-fighting among marijuana supporters.

The latest negative campaigning against the MPP effort actually is the second time this year that a pro-legalization group has upset the already-delicate chances of legalization. The first was a coalition of dispensaries that demanded they be given a leg up on would-be competitors in any newly formed system of retail marijuana stores.

Now, Arizonans for Mindful Regulation has persuaded Safer Arizona — formerly a backer of the MPP initiative — to adopt its cause. Its leader, Jason Medar, is a former Orange County, California, medical-marijuana dispensary owner who helped sink that state’s 2010 legalization initiative, Proposition 19. Medar claims he opposed the measure out of principle, not because he felt it was a threat to his businesses. Prop 19 failed 53.5 percent to 46.5 percent

Medar left his California dispensaries and apparently has no business ventures planned in Arizona. The AZFMR’s campaign doesn’t focus on commercial aspects of legalization.

It focuses on keeping pot users out of jail.

The group has its own multi-page initiative — and it’s similar to the MPP’s measure in that it ends prohibition.

But the AZFMR’s proposal goes further by calling for, among other things, a reduction in the penalty for the possession of eight ounces for sale from a felony to a misdemeanor.

Don’t mistake Medar’s campaign for less-serious measures that have been filed with the state with no chance of making the ballot, such as the proposed Re-Legalize All Drugs initiative.
Medar’s group claims to have gathered about 6,000 signatures so far.

But the AZFMR’s enthusiastic crowd lacks one very important thing: money. And it has to raise the same amount of signatures as the MPP.

Medar vows that if his group’s initiative fails to make the ballot, the campaign will use its resources to persuade voters to vote “no” on the MPP measure.

They hate it that much — even though it appears to be the best way to further their interests.

In less than a year, we will know which legal marijuana initiative gets the spot on the November 2016 ballot (if any measure actually makes it. It's really too early to tell). 

Campaigns on both sides are in full swing, with organizations like the Marijuana Policy Project spending big bucks to ensure their measure lands on the ballot next year, and groups like Arizonans for Responsible Drug Policy fighting hard to keep that from happening. 

Said group released today a list of 45 municipal leaders, whom we shall call allies in the anti-legal weed fight. There aren't any from Tucson, but a lot of names from the Phoenix area (Mesa, Chandler, etc.). Prescott and Sahuarita are also represented. 

“Our cities and towns know first hand the damaging effects of marijuana on their citizens and resources, and they are rightly concerned that making a dangerous substance legal and more available will only magnify the social and financial strain on their communities," says Chair Seth Leibsohn, chairman of Arizonans for Responsible Drug Policy, in a statement to the media. "We're proud to have such a strong bipartisan municipal coalition of support in our effort to ensure drugs like marijuana stay illegal."

To this list add other names such as Pima County Attorney Barbara LaWall, Yavapai County Attorney Sheila Polk and Maricopa County Attorney Bill Montgomery. 

Here's the list (which side are you on?):

Chairman of the anti-legal marijuana group Arizonans for Responsible Drug Policy, Seth Leibsohn, and a former state superintendent, Jaime Molera, aren't glorifying the possible revenue legalizing weed would bring to Arizona's education system. 

Earlier in the day, the Marijuana Policy Project, which leads one of a handful of initiatives seeking to legalize weed in the state for adults 21 and over, held a press conference in Phoenix, where they discussed that their measure could generate more than $40 million annually to go toward education. 

The group's measure proposes taxing marijuana at 15 percent from licensed retail stores selling to adults 21 and older. A lot of that money will be used for implementation, and enforcement of regulations. All additional tax revenue collected, 40 percent would go to the state's Department of Education for school construction, maintenance, and operating costs, and another 40 percent to the department's full-day kindergarten programs.

Leibsohn says there is no tax high enough to offset the dangers of making a "dangerous substance more widely available."

"It has no place in the conversation on positive education reform," he says in a statement. 

"We know that one in six adolescents who experiment with marijuana will become addicted, that today’s marijuana is far more potent and damaging than the marijuana of the past, and that marijuana use can lead to lower IQs, higher propensities to drop out, impaired cognitive function, negative changes in the brain, and a rise in suspensions and expulsions," he says. "There's no tax high enough to offset the risks of making a dangerous substance more widely available in our society, and it has no place in the conversation on positive education reform." 

To what Molera adds: “To regulate marijuana like alcohol, knowing all the damage alcohol causes in our school-aged population, is an education, social, and financial policy disaster. One cannot legalize a dangerous substance for adults and expect it to be kept out of the hands and brains of our youth — that is why far more Arizona students currently use alcohol than marijuana. Legalizing marijuana will mean more students will use a dangerous substance that negatively affects every single outcome that serious education professionals have dedicated their lives to improving."

MPP has to collect more than 150,000 valid signatures to get on the November 2016 ballot. The campaign has already collected about 60,000 total signatures since May.