New Dispensary/compassion Club Distribution Model Proposal

[t0rpid]

Having read the recent court of appeals ruling, I think I have a solution that addresses all the problems with patient to patient transfers and the model that most dispensaries currently operate under (P2P sales).

 

Yes, it would require a modification to the dispenary's business models, but the principle of my model is based on the assumption that qualifying patients can have a caregiver, and simultaneously be a caregiver for up to 5 patients.

 

Think multi level marketing - Amway style. This really is keeping with the heart of a "compassion club" or "collective" - ultimately it's caregivers helping patients.

 

It would require some coordination, and will require caregivers to meet at the club/dispensary/whatever you call it with all their patients (groups of 6) at scheduled times, but so long as the transfer of medicine is strictly between the caregiver and their respective patients, as far as I can tell it's 100% within the confines of the MMA law. Here's how it would work:

 

 

My diagram shows a model that covers 125 "club members", 25 "VIPs" and 5 employees. It's infinitely expandable. The employees could have all 5 of their patients be VIP's, or just 1. The risks are further reduced if the ratio between employees and VIP's is kept high to low.

 

Put the club employees (the most highly trusted that interact directly with the growers). This relationship is represented in the solid green box. Each box represents 1 person.

 

Below them are the employees, there would exist what I like to call "VIP" patients/caregivers (represented in the Green Outlined Box). The club employees could have an interview/screening process and written agreements with these VIP patients on how marijuana is dispensed, etc to the end registered MMJ patients ("club members" in the blue outlined box).

 

Those VIP's, who are patients to the employees, become caregivers to up to 5 club members. There could even exist special VIP's that assist with solely with the delivery of medication to club members unable to drive.

 

This would also involve Incorporating SECURE storage lockers into the clubhouse, with each individual locker ONLY accessible to the individual employee and EACH INDIVIDUAL VIP and NO ONE ELSE. When the club members arrive at a specified time (say for example, weekly or bi-weekly) with the VIP, the VIP dispenses the medicine to the club members that they are caregivers for.

 

Under this model, there could still exist "bud tenders" on site that would have very small amounts of every strain of medical marijuana (that they themselves possess) sold in the club for club members to inspect, so long as they do not sell that outright to the patients.

 

The advantages of keeping all the medicine on site are many: it is stored in an "enclosed, locked facility", it addresses the issue of growers getting robbed out of their homes, etc. There are no patient to patient transfers or sales, it's strictly caregiver to patient transfers. Compensation could be in the form of membership dues which club members pay to the VIP, and the VIP to the employee, and the employee to the grower, but you get the idea. Also, only up to 5 patients would have to have their information shared with their caregiver. It doesn't reveal the identities of those higher up in the chain or other club members besides those in their group.

 

The disadvantages would mean that people could no longer simply be able to walk into a club with a medical marijuana card and walk out with medicine in hand the same day, without first establishing a primary caregiver through the MDCH. Also, the amount of medicine that can be legally possessed at any given time decreases with each level of the pyramid. If a grower or employee were to not comply with the MMA and had their card revoked, it would at least temporally interrupt the supply chain for those under them, HOWEVER the advantage to this is, granted there are multiple employees spread out among many growers, there's little risk of shutting down the entire operation.

 

I can't think of any better way to do this. Lawyers, what do you think of this?

[mrd]

I like this idea but it does not address the idea that people might bs and do this in several places letting the inordinate lag times of card processing cover them. Paperwork is not a card. Plus an individual could theoretically cancel the arrangement without informing the disp.. and have several running. this would allow a black marketer to acquire at low cost and then sell at street. So this needs to be addressed too.

[Kevin]

Anyone read the dispensary bill written by Attorney Karen O'Keefe who is Director of State Policies for MPP?

 

Think I got my copy on http://www.mpp.org

 

Gets my vote.

[medicinejeff]

The caregiver must be the distribution point in any collective now. (4)(e) is still intact. Thanks, Bb

 

Legos for the win!

[Mememe]

Would the RICO act apply if MM went MLM?

[MIMEDGROW]

we have been utilizing this model for at least a year now and have found that it is by far the only way for any point of distribution to multiple patients withen a network to exist.

[t0rpid]

I like this idea but it does not address the idea that people might bs and do this in several places letting the inordinate lag times of card processing cover them. Paperwork is not a card. Plus an individual could theoretically cancel the arrangement without informing the disp.. and have several running. this would allow a black marketer to acquire at low cost and then sell at street. So this needs to be addressed too.

 

Paperwork is a card under the MMA - it's spelled out clearly, either issue a card with X amount of days, or your paperwork becomes the card.

 

If I were running a club, this is how I would do things: I would require plastic cards for all employees and VIP club members. Every VIP club member and employee acting as a caregiver would also have to be free of any felonies (the reason I say this is it won't be long before the republican legislature enacts this change - they are already talking about it in Lansing and it's inevitable that it would happen). Plus, if I were a patient, having a convicted felon with my personal contact information including my social security number, acting as my caregiver would make me uneasy anyway.

 

This wouldn't apply to club members who are solely patients. The legislature can't touch them anyway.

For the club members acting solely as patients, I would accept mailed in paperwork properly postmarked along with an image of the cashed check to the MDCH with endorsement on the back (it's not hard to get this from a bank).

 

Would the RICO act apply if MM went MLM?

 

That's an interesting question - it certainly could put people at much greater risk for more severe penalties if the feds decided to get involved, but since marijuana is still illegal at the federal level, I would think that they both would be charged simultaneously. Have any dispensaries been charged under RICO in other states who follow a similar model?

[t0rpid]

MLM?? lil' help please, not sure what this one is.

 

MLM is "Multi Level Marketing", a term that Amway likes to use instead of the pejorative term "pyramid scheme".

[Fat Freddy]

Recently I had a craving for some hash, so I took a road trip to AA. To my dismay I was informed that all dispensaries were closed.

At last I found a few persons that informed me that during the week there had been 4 raids on dispensaries, due to a high court ruling that they were illegal. At last I found a care giver and took care of my needs.

We really need to get our best legal minds on this and maybe put together a well drafted law for a public vote.

I am sick of the man trying to circumvent the will of the people. I voted for the right to self medicate an I'll be damned if I will allow

some self righteous ag to run rampant over my rights in the name of saving us from ourselves. I believe that most of us keep our distance from schools, churches and the like. In order to avoid even the slightest inclination of wrongful conduct. Elections are coming soon all I need to know is who is in favor of our right and who is not. Once I know that, I will be passing out pink slips to those who are not supportive of our rights. Any one keeping track of who is who? The pen is indeed mightier then the sword, an I wield it with zeal for justice.

[Timmahh]

Fat Freedy, in the Legal section of the forum, i believe that is where it is at, there is a thread titled, Friend or Foe of our Law. that thread has all the foes names, so those who to compain AGAINST, for every reason, not just their anti mmj stance. it also lists those who are understanding of the will of the voters, and want to correctly implement the law, and to ensure our rights are protected, like everyone elses. now these folks are obviously the minority, so need our GOOD support.

 

to the point of the thread, i believe, with proper setup, self policing, and set and fair labor costs, ran as a NON PROF Orginization, it could be fully legal and fully compliant.

It would also need to be setup in a "Social Network" if you will, delegated by county. the more Pts the more networks you need to setup in each count. you can not have one main MLM covering the entire state, it would need to be multiple and seperate entities, but each Socially networked into a .org NPO, where Card Verification can be done. all cost of providing the meds is covered, including a fair yet appropriate labor cost, perhaps broken down to each duty required thru the grow process, and a set time aloted for each process. Much like any manufacturing company handles multi step processes when putting value to labor dependant on task at hand and knowledge, materials needed.

 

without this systematic detailed setup, i feel things could be made much worse, when it came time to do taxes. and by that im referring to the large variety of cost of labor different people will charge. if i say my time is worth 50.00 an hr, and the next guy says his time is worth 125.00 an hr, yet the 3rd guy say im only worth 20.00 an hr, yet everyone is doing the same tasks, (sure having different experience levels) but that is precisely why a self policing body would need to be setup, to determine fair and honest labor costs. without it, then there is a large chance it could then entice the tax boards to step in and do it for everyone. just thinking outloud where this thread is concerned.

 

but fact is, labor is a cost of any work. if one can not recoup cost for time invested, the the honest truth of the matter is, the availability, and even the quality of the meds will be reduced. One needs to be able to keep the lights on next month, so they can supply meds to pts. if one can not recoup cost of labor, then one is doomed to fail in our Capitalists Society. Time is Money. sad but true.

[GrowGoddess]

In my opinion, the right way to solve these problems is to pool all of our money together. For example: 80,000 patients donate $10 each which would equal $800,000. Invest half towards winning the Supreme Court battle that Brandon and Matt (Mt. Pleasant CA) plan to do. Then if we win, we can run a dispensary the way we want. If we don't collectively invest, Brandon and Matt's low paid lawyer will be fighting this battle for all of us. Are you sure that is what we want? What I would recommend for the other half of the money is a poll from the people to choose which marijuana case to invest in. Such as, fight fire with fire. That would be $400,000 which could pay for many private investigators and high quality lawyers to dig up dirty laundry on the justice system, police, prosecutor, etc. I bet they would really enjoy sitting in court having to explain the porn on their computers, not paying taxes, spousal abuse, and so much more. How could they justify their credibility with having so much dirty laundry hanging over their heads? Who knows what we could dig up with that kind of money? If we did this just once, every police station would think twice before messing with us. It is just a matter of us all being organized rather than fighting each other. We can't let Brandon and Matt fight the fight in the Supreme Court alone, we could all be losers.

 

As for me, I don't have problems obtaining patients and providing medicine to them. My patients and I have no need for dispensaries. I do support them though for those who are not so lucky. Also, I believe the dispensaries bring more revenue to our state. It seems like our lawmakers are destroying our economy by making too many laws. Taking away our rights. Either we pool together and do something about it or we are all screwed.

 

If the 3MA decided to do such a thing, keeping it completely transparent, i.e. showing all income via donations and showing all receipts of expenses. I would not only pay the suggested donation for myself but also for each of my patients, and more.

 

Just my opinion...

[Dr. Bob]

Having read the recent court of appeals ruling, I think I have a solution that addresses all the problems with patient to patient transfers and the model that most dispensaries currently operate under (P2P sales).

 

Yes, it would require a modification to the dispenary's business models, but the principle of my model is based on the assumption that qualifying patients can have a caregiver, and simultaneously be a caregiver for up to 5 patients.

 

Think multi level marketing - Amway style. This really is keeping with the heart of a "compassion club" or "collective" - ultimately it's caregivers helping patients.

 

It would require some coordination, and will require caregivers to meet at the club/dispensary/whatever you call it with all their patients (groups of 6) at scheduled times, but so long as the transfer of medicine is strictly between the caregiver and their respective patients, as far as I can tell it's 100% within the confines of the MMA law. Here's how it would work:

 

 

My diagram shows a model that covers 125 "club members", 25 "VIPs" and 5 employees. It's infinitely expandable. The employees could have all 5 of their patients be VIP's, or just 1. The risks are further reduced if the ratio between employees and VIP's is kept high to low.

 

Put the club employees (the most highly trusted that interact directly with the growers). This relationship is represented in the solid green box. Each box represents 1 person.

 

Below them are the employees, there would exist what I like to call "VIP" patients/caregivers (represented in the Green Outlined Box). The club employees could have an interview/screening process and written agreements with these VIP patients on how marijuana is dispensed, etc to the end registered MMJ patients ("club members" in the blue outlined box).

 

Those VIP's, who are patients to the employees, become caregivers to up to 5 club members. There could even exist special VIP's that assist with solely with the delivery of medication to club members unable to drive.

 

This would also involve Incorporating SECURE storage lockers into the clubhouse, with each individual locker ONLY accessible to the individual employee and EACH INDIVIDUAL VIP and NO ONE ELSE. When the club members arrive at a specified time (say for example, weekly or bi-weekly) with the VIP, the VIP dispenses the medicine to the club members that they are caregivers for.

 

Under this model, there could still exist "bud tenders" on site that would have very small amounts of every strain of medical marijuana (that they themselves possess) sold in the club for club members to inspect, so long as they do not sell that outright to the patients.

 

The advantages of keeping all the medicine on site are many: it is stored in an "enclosed, locked facility", it addresses the issue of growers getting robbed out of their homes, etc. There are no patient to patient transfers or sales, it's strictly caregiver to patient transfers. Compensation could be in the form of membership dues which club members pay to the VIP, and the VIP to the employee, and the employee to the grower, but you get the idea. Also, only up to 5 patients would have to have their information shared with their caregiver. It doesn't reveal the identities of those higher up in the chain or other club members besides those in their group.

 

The disadvantages would mean that people could no longer simply be able to walk into a club with a medical marijuana card and walk out with medicine in hand the same day, without first establishing a primary caregiver through the MDCH. Also, the amount of medicine that can be legally possessed at any given time decreases with each level of the pyramid. If a grower or employee were to not comply with the MMA and had their card revoked, it would at least temporally interrupt the supply chain for those under them, HOWEVER the advantage to this is, granted there are multiple employees spread out among many growers, there's little risk of shutting down the entire operation.

 

I can't think of any better way to do this. Lawyers, what do you think of this?

 

I am going to review this, but basically it looks like a model I and others have put out. The key is organization of the network and the ability to assign patients and caregivers to places within the network. I'll review it a bit more and make any other comments as needed. Good that we are thinking of solutions rather than complaining about the ruling. That is how progress is made.

 

Dr. Bob

[mike44]

I am sure everyone is familiar with Senate Bill 17 (0017)

which will be voted on sometime in the near future.

a partial excerpt from the proposed bill:

 

A bill to amend 1978 PA 368, entitled

"Public health code,"

(MCL 333.1101 to 333.25211) by adding section 7421.

THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN ENACT:

SEC. 74 1 21. (1) A PERSON SHALL NOT ORGANIZE OR OPERATE A

2 MARIHUANA CLUB.

 

Please read the whole bill on the Michigan legislature website and don't take the quote out of context

as I appear to have done. They give their definition of a marihuana club on the website

[northerngal]

The "original model" of compassion club, seems to be the safest legal model to assist PT's and CG's. A model that seems hard to argue with. (no medication, no plant material, etc.) Making a safe place for PT's and CG's to learn, meet and organize within the current law. Obviously, there is no cash to be made within this model, but to be assisting PT's and CG's within law and educating others IS enough for some people. From what I see, there are many CG's and many patients that have no other outlet to meet and organize without these CC's. If these existed in every county in the state, what need do we have for dispensary models?

[northerngal]

Because people need a place to easily dump their cannabis for cash. No doubt about it. We could have a amendment that makes it so we could give away cannabis to anyone with a card, patient or caregiver, free transfers between any and all card holders. But when this idea is presented it is called 'weak'. Even though this would solve the problems for the sickest and the dying, people still stand in the way because it doesn't address how they are going to get paid. You can even add in 'mature' to the plant count wording, which would makes things so much easier, but that isn't even enough to turn heads toward the free transfer amendment. There is NO opposition to the free transfer amendment other than so called advocates FOR patients.

 

 

Perhaps I am misunderstanding you or vice versa, but the model of CC I speak of is not a venue to provide free medication. (although I would hope that a CC would help assist those in true need find someone that can help.)

 

The idea is to network, educate and to assist Pt's in finding CG's and CG's in finding PT's.

 

I am not sure what you are referring to with your response. The link at the top of the page, unless changed, will describe the original model of a CC.

[northerngal]

Yes, I understand the cc concept. I started one of the first in the state. Then it was wrestled from us and turned into a dispensary.

 

We shouldn't need a 'venue' to transfer from when our law allows it. It's the compensation part that is the 'sticky situation' with any opposition. Eliminate the compensation(we can get creative about that) and we are golden. No opposition to transfers for free. Then there is no need for a pyramid or any other complicated scheme, you just freely transfer to ANYONE with a card.

 

Sounds great to me. I just can't find anyone on here that agrees to help the sickest and dying in this way.... it should have been job one back in the beginning.

 

I understand what point you are making. I am sorry your club was turned into a dispensary. I try to see things in "black and white" and sometimes that is difficult when "getting creative" is mentioned. I suppose each to their own, but rather than spinning in circles trying to circumvent something, I prefer to try to work within it.

 

Most of us do not have the time and resources to fight major legal battles. We know opposition is getting trickier and trickier by the day. It makes sense to me to try to stay within these "guidelines" set forth, until we get them changed, whether we like them or not is obviously irrelevant.

 

Thus my reasoning on the original CC model. Not a "venue" to sell meds, not a venue to make money, ONLY a place to educate others, network and connect CG's and PT's, so no patient is forced to go without!!! They stregthen the community on a local mmj level and also on the state mmj level. Who can oppose a meeting where there is nothing that can be challenged within the law?

[Mememe]

Ran as a NON PROF Orginization would cause an official register of its members and directors to become public info. A list for the opposition to hunt from.

[Cap'N Kush]

Paperwork is a card under the MMA - it's spelled out clearly, either issue a card with X amount of days, or your paperwork becomes the card.

 

If I were running a club, this is how I would do things: I would require plastic cards for all employees and VIP club members. Every VIP club member and employee acting as a caregiver would also have to be free of any felonies (the reason I say this is it won't be long before the republican legislature enacts this change - they are already talking about it in Lansing and it's inevitable that it would happen). Plus, if I were a patient, having a convicted felon with my personal contact information including my social security number, acting as my caregiver would make me uneasy anyway.

 

This wouldn't apply to club members who are solely patients. The legislature can't touch them anyway.

For the club members acting solely as patients, I would accept mailed in paperwork properly postmarked along with an image of the cashed check to the MDCH with endorsement on the back (it's not hard to get this from a bank).

 

 

 

That's an interesting question - it certainly could put people at much greater risk for more severe penalties if the feds decided to get involved, but since marijuana is still illegal at the federal level, I would think that they both would be charged simultaneously. Have any dispensaries been charged under RICO in other states who follow a similar model?

 

Not every person that is a convicted felon, is some dirt ball, that wants to rob you and steal your identity, If you can remember as far back as three years ago MM was illegal and was a felony. Actually Cannabis is a schedule 1 narcotic and still is under federal law, so if you got plants growing your a committing a a felony under federal law. So look in the mirror bro before you start pointing your finger. Just a thought,

 

You idea was good though, it just fell off when you started bashing a bunch of people. Just because someone has a felony does mean they dont deserve to participate. The logic behind that is horrible. Just because something is illegal doesn't mean its necessarily morally wrong, and some of those things are felonies. As the law is right now, you can rape babies, murder woman, break in to peoples houses and you can grow mm, but if you ever sold weed before the mm law your out and cant participate. Thats BS o you can rape babies and still get student loans to, but not if you sold a bag of weed. LMFAO its people like you that is why it is like it is, you compromise your morals. RIGHT AND WRONG CANT BE COMPROMISED! STOP COMPROMISING! THATS WHY THIS CRAP HAPPENED IN THE FIRST PLACE THE LAW WAS RIGHTEN AS A COMPROMISE!

[Dr. Bob]

Please do not consider getting 'tricky' about indirect compensation. You will still be convicted and they will add criminal conspiracy to the charge. If I certify you and instead of paying me you pay my cable bill, you are still paying me. If I was a judge and you tried to convince me you gave meds to someone for free but charged for the bag, I'd be t'ed off you thought I was that stupid and throw the book at you on general principles.

 

Dr. Bob

[DreamWarrior67]

someone told me their are doing this in Detroit is it legal and will it work.

 

have patient fill out a temporary caregiver form and then help them out and on the way out the door ask them if they still want them to be their caregiver. lets say no and then you give them their paper work back.

 

and do this for every person that needs help with meds. could this work yes, no, maybe?