Vote successful!

What score do you give?

0.0 0.0/10 (0 ratings)

Business

Last Updated Projects in Business

48
'"`UNIQ--vote-00000007-QINU`"'
hallo
project id project title project type project status project scope address zipcode city county state country description desired outcome published by publishing date forwarded by forwarding date creator creating date archived featured page id page title issue ids agency ids official ids last modified latitude request longitude initiator cover photo allow moderator photo upload pinned solution id sponsored banner image profile image step ids active step id archetype group id person id
659357 Stop the Injustice in LA and Grant Social Equity Marijuana Business Permits Now! Active State Los Angeles, CA, USA Los Angeles Los Angeles County CA US Despite marijuana being legal ,the city of Los Angeles has 15 million people and only 300 licensed dispensaries. Compared to 50,000 bars licensed (not restaurants) . We need permits granted and we need them now! 0000-00-00 00:00:00 0000-00-00 00:00:00 Justin Hartfield 2019-12-04 13:59:28 no 0 320857 Proj:587473 113 46568 49752,49753,49755,49764,49761,49756,49763,49762,49758,49760,49757,49759,49754,49751,49750 2019-12-04 14:03:27 34.0522342 No -118.2436849 Yes 45435 no Cityscape of Los Angeles Los Angeles County California United States size-k.jpeg 0 0 0
470524 Rohrabacher-Farr Amendment Active Washington D.C., DC, USA Washington District of Columbia DC US Twenty-nine States have enacted laws that allow patients access to medical marijuana and its derivatives, such as CBD oils. 61% of Republicans and a whopping 76% of Independents favor making medical marijuana legal and available to their patients who need it. 80% of Democrats feel the same way. Despite this overwhelming shift in public opinion, the Federal Government continues its hard-line oppression against medical marijuana. Some people are suffering and if a doctor feels that he needs to prescribe something to alleviate that suffering, it is immoral for this government to get in the way, and that is what is happening. The State governments have recognized that a doctor has a right to treat his patient any way he sees fit, and so did our Founding Fathers. 0000-00-00 00:00:00 0000-00-00 00:00:00 2019-11-22 04:58:05 no 0 320822 Proj:504993 113 47372 999688 2019-11-22 06:57:10 38.9071923 No -77.0368707 Yes 10818 no Project banner 470524.jpg 0 0 698581
270469 USDA Hemp Regulations: What Was Expected, Unexpected and Unanswered Active Denver, CO, USA Denver Denver County CO US On October 29, 2019, the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) released its long-awaited hemp cultivation regulations, marking the first federal hemp farming regulations in the United States since the crop was banned in 1937. These regulations implement provisions of the 2018 Farm Bill and are effective October 31, 2019.

What provisions were unexpected? 1. Transportation - Given all of the on-going interstate transportation issues (major issues - including multiple seizures of lawfully grown hemp, arrests of drivers, and criminal charges) and the need for businesses, regulators and enforcement agencies to clearly identify legally grown hemp and transport it without risk, the USDA previously hinted it would create a uniform shipping manifest. Instead, the USDA simply repeated the interstate transportation protection outlined in the 2018 Farm Bill, clarifying that states, tribes, and territories cannot prohibit the transfer of hemp across their borders. 2. “Acceptable hemp THC level” - While many were optimistic that the USDA would allow for a reasonable margin of error in testing, we were surprised by their approach. The USDA incorporated the margin for error inherent in potency testing, (termed the “Measure of Uncertainty”) into the potency calculation for a given sample, specifying that a cannabis plant is legal hemp for USDA purposes if the tested THC level plus or minus the Measure of Uncertainty is 0.3% or below. Notably, this level has no impact on potential CSA liability. 3. DEA-registered testing facilities - In what feels like a throwback to prohibition and reefer madness, the rules require that all laboratories testing hemp must be registered with the DEA. USDA is also considering adding a USDA approval requirement for labs testing hemp. ISO 17025 accreditation is not required at this time but is being considered. Most testing labs currently testing hemp do not have a DEA registration. 4. Zero tolerance for “Hot Hemp” - We anticipated law enforcement agencies wouldn't allow the USDA to give much leeway in the remediation of plants that test hot. Still, we were hopeful that some reasonable re-testing or remediation would be permitted, as many states have allowed, given the numerous factors that can result in a hot crop without malfeasance by a farmer. However, the rules are clear that “Hot hemp” is considered marijuana as defined in the Controlled Substances Act and must be disposed of in accordance with the CSA and DEA regulations by a person authorized to handle marijuana (a DEA-registered reverse distributor, federal, state, or local law enforcement officer)... meaning opportunities for remediation or “alternative means of destruction” are non-existent. 5. Third-party sample collection - All samples of “cannabis” intended for delta-9 THC concentration testing must be collected by designated third-party samplers, such as approved federal, state, or local law enforcement, within 15 days prior to harvest. This will potentially require state departments of agriculture to stop sampling hemp crops unless they are included as authorized third parties.

0000-00-00 00:00:00 0000-00-00 00:00:00 2019-11-16 03:04:55 no 0 320715 Proj:298694 113 47353 999673,999674 2019-11-22 07:13:34 39.7392358 No -104.990251 Yes 519188 no Project banner 270469.jpg 0 101 5250802
749497 Amendments to Chapter 9 to add Medical Cannabis Uses (Transporation Distribution Testing) Active Global Cathedral City, CA, USA Cathedral City Riverside County CA US At issue is whether the City desires to require that testing labs, transporters and distributors be subject to the same CUP process as other medical cannabis uses, or to consider an alternative process such as allowing the businesses as a use by right, with appropriate conditions, in areas where similar uses are allowed. Other localities, such as Oakland and Santa Rosa, have taken, or are considering taking, this approach. Since the potential impact to these businesses is likely less than the other license types, and these license types are not pre-existing in the City, allowing them as permitted uses may be appropriate and efficient to administer. Testing laboratories, for example, could be allowed in zones where medical offices or laboratories are currently permitted (PPO, PLC, MXC, NBP), and distribution/transportation facilities could be permitted uses where storage facilities and/or warehouses uses are currently permitted (CPB-2, I-1). These license types could also be permitted as conditional uses in zones where similar uses are only allowed as conditional uses (PCC). 0000-00-00 00:00:00 0000-00-00 00:00:00 2019-11-16 02:55:05 no 0 320714 Proj:824069 113 25563,997372 26237,999677,999679 2019-11-16 04:55:21 33.7805388 No -116.4668036 Yes 993403 no Cityscape of Cathedral City Riverside County California United States size-k.jpeg 0 101 5250802
420291 City of Cathedral City RFQ: Expert Legal Assistance in Cannabis Active Cathedral City, CA, USA Cathedral City Riverside County CA US The City of Cathedral City, California is seeking expert legal assistance in the development of an ordinance allowing and regulating medical marijuana cultivation, processing and testing operations and potentially as Council considers possible amendments to the existing dispensary ordinance. 0000-00-00 00:00:00 0000-00-00 00:00:00 2019-11-16 02:45:52 no 0 320713 Proj:499928 113 25555 26229 2019-11-16 02:50:25 33.7805388 No -116.4668036 Yes 459869 no Cityscape of Cathedral City Riverside County California United States size-k.jpeg 0 0 7340465
73782 Airbnb's Complaint Against the City of Boston for Injunctive Relief Active Local Boston, MA, USA Boston Suffolk County MA US This is a case about a city trying to conscript home-sharing platforms into

enforcing regulations on the city’s behalf, in a manner that would thwart both federal and Massachusetts law. The City of Boston has enacted an Ordinance limiting short-term residential rentals by hosts. But it goes much further than that. The Ordinance also enlists home-sharing platforms like Airbnb into enforcing those limits under threat of draconian penalties, including $300-per-violation-per-day fines and complete banishment from doing business in Boston. Airbnb believes that home-sharing may be lawfully regulated, and it has worked with dozens of cities to develop the tools they need to do so without violating federal or state law. Boston’s heavy-handed approach, however, crosses several clear legal lines and must be invalidated.

0000-00-00 00:00:00 0000-00-00 00:00:00 2019-09-28 04:47:54 no 0 320561 Proj:153248 117 16115,997365,16260 16704,999661 2019-09-28 06:42:47 42.3600825 No -71.0588801 Yes 145166 yes Cityscape of Boston Suffolk County Massachusetts United States size-k.jpeg 0 0 1435418

Top Agencies in Business

Top Officials in Business

0 Followers
0 Views
48 Projects