Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
Agenda Packet cc 10-18-16
AGENDA OF A REGULAR MEETING - NATIONAL CITY CITY COUNCIL/ COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION - HOUSING AUTHORITY OF THE CITY OF NATIONAL CITY 4,- CALIFORNIA - NATIONAL City `NCo$poRATBD RON MORRISON Mayor JERRY CANO Vice Mayor ALBERT MENDIVIL Councilmember MONA RIOS Councilmember ALEJANDRA SOTELO-SOLIS Councilmember 1243 National City Blvd. National City 619-336-4240 Meeting agendas and minutes available on web WWW.NATIONALCITYCA. GOV COUNCIL CHAMBERS CIVIC CENTER 1243 NATIONAL CITY BOULEVARD NATIONAL CITY, CALIFORNIA TUESDAY, OCTOBER 18, 2016 - 6:00 PM ORDER OF BUSINESS: Public sessions of all Regular Meetings of the City Council / Community Development Commission - Housing Authority (hereafter referred to as Elected Body) begin at 6:00 p.m. on the first and third Tuesday of each month. Public Hearings begin at 6:00 p.m. unless otherwise noted. Closed Sessions begin at 5:00 p.m. or such other time as noted. If a workshop is scheduled, the subject and time of the workshop will appear on the agenda. The Mayor and Council members also sit as the Chairperson and Members of the Board of the Community Development Commission (CDC). REPORTS: All open session agenda items and reports as well as all documents and writings distributed to the Elected Body less than 72 hours prior to the meeting, are available for review at the entry to the Council Chambers. Regular Meetings of the Elected Body are webcast and archived on the City's website www.nationalcityca.gov. PUBLIC COMMENTS: Prior to the Business portion of the agenda, the Elected Body will receive public comments regarding any matters within the jurisdiction of the City and/or the Community Development Commission. Members of the public may also address any item on the agenda at the time the item is considered by the Elected Body. Persons who wish to address the Elected Body are requested to fill out a "Request to Speak" form available at the entrance to the City Council Chambers, and turn in the completed form to the City Clerk. The Mayor or Chairperson will separately call for testimony of those persons who have turned in a "Request to Speak" form. If you wish to speak, please step to the podium at the appropriate time and state your name and address (optional) for the record. The time limit established for public testimony is three minutes per speaker unless a different time limit is announced. Speakers are encouraged to be brief. The Mayor or Chairperson may limit the length of comments due to the number of persons wishing to speak or if comments become repetitious or irrelevant. WRITTEN AGENDA: With limited exceptions, the Elected Body may take action only upon items appearing on the written agenda. Items not appearing on the agenda must be brought back on a subsequent agenda unless they are of a demonstrated emergency or urgent nature, and the need to take action on such items arose after the agenda was posted. CONSENT CALENDAR: Consent calendar items involve matters which are of a routine or noncontroversial nature. All consent items are adopted by approval of a single motion by the City Council. Prior to such approval, any item may be removed from the consent portion of 1 of 669 CC/CDC-HA Agenda 10/18/2016 — Page 2 the agenda and separately considered, upon request of a Councilmember, a staff member, or a member of the public. Upon request, this agenda can be made available in appropriate alternative formats to persons with a disability in compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act. Please contact the City Clerk's Office at (619) 336-4228 to request a disability -related modification or accommodation. Notification 24-hours prior to the meeting will enable the City to make reasonable arrangements to ensure accessibility to this meeting. Spanish audio interpretation is provided during Elected Body Meetings. Audio headphones are available in the lobby at the beginning of the meeting. Audio interpretacion en espanol se proporciona durante sesiones del Consejo Municipal. Los audiofonos estan disponibles en el pasillo al principio de la junta. COUNCIL REQUESTS THAT ALL CELL PHONES AND PAGERS BE TURNED OFF DURING CITY COUNCIL MEETINGS. 2 of 669 CC/CDC-HA Agenda 10/18/2016 — Page 3 OPEN TO THE PUBLIC A. CITY COUNCIL CALL TO ORDER ROLL CALL PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE TO THE FLAG PUBLIC COMMENTS (THREE -MINUTE TIME LIMIT) PROCLAMATIONS 1. Proclaiming October 16 through October 22, 2016 as: Freedom from Workplace Bullies Week. AWARDS AND RECOGNITIONS PRESENTATIONS INTERVIEWS / APPOINTMENTS 2. Interviews and Appointments: Various Boards & Commissions - Current Vacancy (Community and Police Relations Commission) and Expiring Term (Port Commission). (City Clerk) CONSENT CALENDAR 3. Motion of the City Council of the City of National City approving the waiving of the reading of the text of the Ordinances considered at this meeting and providing that such Ordinances shall be introduced and/or adopted after a reading of the title only. (City Clerk) 4. Resolution of the City Council of the City of National City establishing General Fund appropriations in the amount of $10,000 per the Sweetwater Authority Letter of Agreement for the City of National City to provide landscape design services for a Water Conservation Demonstration Garden in Kimball Park next to Paradise Creek. (Engineering/Public Works) 5. Resolution of the City Council of the City of National City, 1) awarding a contract in the not -to -exceed amount of $99,759.00 to Portillo Concrete, Inc. for the E. 16th Street and Grove Street Pedestrian Enhancements Project, CIP No. 16-03; 2) authorizing a 15% contingency in the amount of 3 of 669 CC/CDC-HA Agenda 10/18/2016 — Page 4 $14,963.85 for any unforeseen changes; and 3) authorizing the Mayor to execute the contract. (Engineering/Public Works) Resolution of the City Council of the City of National City authorizing the appropriation of $70,000.00 in the Plaza Boulevard Widening CIP expenditure account from Transportation Development Impact Fee (TDIF) fund balance for construction of the Plaza Boulevard Widening Project. (Engineering/Public Works) 7 Resolution of the City Council of the City of National City authorizing the appropriation of $95,000.00 in the corresponding CIP expenditure accounts for Kimball Park & El Toyon Park Improvements from Park Development Impact Fee fund balance to be allocated to the City Council approved 15% contingency for construction of the Kimball Park & El Toyon Park Improvements Project. (Engineering/Public Works) Resolution of the City Council of the City of National City authorizing the appropriation of $75,000 in the Traffic Monitoring CIP expenditure account from General Fund fund balance to conduct Citywide Engineering & Traffic Surveys to establish speed limits in accordance with Section 40802(a) of the California Vehicle Code. (Engineering/Public Works) 9. Resolution of the City Council of the City of National City authorizing the installation of a blue curb handicap parking space with sign in front of the residence at 24 E. Division Street (TSC No. 2016-08). (Engineering/Public Works) 10. Resolution of the City Council of the City of National City authorizing the installation of a blue curb handicap parking space with sign in front of the residence at 108 E. 5th Street (TSC No. 2016-09). (Engineering/Public Works) 11. Investment transactions for the month ended August 31, 2016. (Finance) 12. Warrant Register #11 for the period of 09/07/16 through 09/13/16 in the amount of $1,970,029.42. (Finance) 13. Warrant Register #12 for the period of 09/14/16 through 09/20/16 in the amount of $1,379,544.19. (Finance) PUBLIC HEARINGS ORDINANCES FOR INTRODUCTION 14. An Ordinance of the City Council of the City of National City adding Chapter 10.14 to Title 10 of the National City Municipal Code to Prohibit all Commercial Marijuana Activity in the City of National City, Regulate the Cultivation of Recreational Marijuana for Personal Use, and Regulate the 4 of 669 CC/CDC-HA Agenda 10/18/2016 — Page 5 Possession of Recreational Marijuana in anticipation of Proposition 64, the Control, Regulate, and Tax Adult Use of Marijuana Act (AUMA), passing on November 8, 2016. (City Attorney) 15. An Urgency Ordinance of the City Council of the City of National City Pursuant to California Government Code Sections 36934 and 36937 adding Chapter 10.14 to Title 10 of the National City Municipal Code to Prohibit all Commercial Marijuana Activity in the City of National City, Regulate the Cultivation of Recreational Marijuana for Personal Use, and Regulate the Possession of Recreational Marijuana in anticipation of Proposition 64, the Control, Regulate, and Tax Adult Use of Marijuana Act (AUMA), passing on November 8, 2016. (City Attorney) ORDINANCES FOR ADOPTION 16. An Ordinance of the City Council of the City of National City repealing Chapter 10.18 (Beekeeping) and adding Chapter 8.34 to Title 8 of the National City Municipal Code to allow for beekeeping in the City. (Applicant City -Initiated) (Case File 2016-05 A) (Planning) NON CONSENT RESOLUTIONS 17. Resolution of the City Council of the City of National City adopting amendments to the City Council Policy Manual; Chapter 100: Administration and Policy Management (Policy 109 - Expenses, 110 - Flags, 114 - Grants). (City Manager) NEW BUSINESS 18. Temporary Use Permit Padres Pedal the Cause Bicycle Ride sponsored by Pedal the Cause on November 12, 2016 from 7:15 a.m. to 8:00 a.m. with no waiver of fees. (Neighborhood Services) 19. Temporary Use Permit - Sweetest Ride Custom Car & Bike Show hosted by Sweetwater Harley Davidson on October 22, 2016 from 10 a.m. to 3 p.m. at 3201 Hoover Avenue with no waiver of fees. (Neighborhood Services) 20. Staff seeks City Council direction on the relocation of the City sponsored Christmas on Brick Row event to Kimball Park and a synthetic ice skating rink for an additional cost of $5,000. (Community Services) 21. Staff report seeking direction on amendments to Title 10 of the National City Municipal Code and to City of National City Council Policy 803 pertaining to the sale and use of alcoholic beverages in city -owned facilities operated and controlled by third parties. (Human Resources) 5 of 669 CC/CDC-HA Agenda 10/18/2016 — Page 6 22. Staff report seeking City Council direction regarding administration of the City of National City's taxicab and other for -hire paratransit vehicle program. (Finance) B. COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION -HOUSING AUTHORITY PUBLIC HEARINGS- HOUSING AUTHORITY CONSENT RESOLUTIONS- HOUSING AUTHORITY NON CONSENT RESOLUTIONS- HOUSING AUTHORITY NEW BUSINESS- HOUSING AUTHORITY C. REPORTS STAFF REPORTS 23. Report on Joint Meeting/Workshop of the City of National City City Council and Planning Commission Scheduled for November 1, 2016 at 4:00 pm to provide a status report on the update of the Downtown Specific Plan. (Planning) MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL CLOSED SESSION REPORT ADJOURNMENT Adjourned Regular Meeting of the Community Development Commission - Housing Authority - Tuesday, October 25, 2016 - 5:00 p.m. - Council Chambers - National City, California Adjourned Regular Meeting of the City Council, meeting in Joint Session with the National City Planning Commission - Tuesday, November 1, 2016 - 4:00 p.m. - Council Chambers - National City, California. Regular Meeting of the City Council and Community Development Commission - Housing Authority of the City of National City - Tuesday - November 1, 2016 - 6:00 p.m. - Council Chambers - National City, California. 6 of 669 CC/CDC-HA Agenda 10/18/2016 — Page 7 City Council and Community Development Commission - Housing Authority of the City of National City Meeting Schedule for the Period January 3, 2017 through January 17, 2017: January 03 - Dispense with Meeting - 6:00 pm January 17 - Regular Meeting - 6:00 pm 7 of 669 CC/CDC-HA Agenda 10/18/2016 — Page 8 The following page(s) contain the backup material for Agenda Item: Proclaiming October 16 through October 22, 2016 as: Freedom from Workplace Bullies Week. 8 of 669 1 ectam CALIFORNIA •.� NATION C ZtV WHEREAS, the City of National City ha an Interest in promoting the social and economic wail -being of its citizens. employees and employers; and WHEREAS, wail -being depends upon the existence of healthy and n�productive amgloyeas working in a safe sind ash ;_r: ;rSe work WHEREAS, resz has documenk,d ilrn health consequences for Individuate caused by exposure to abrasiwi and hostile work environments; and WHEREAS, abu¢Ive workenviron nerda atra cost ly for arripioysrs, with consequences }r?PIudinsg rerticad productivity, abserrtetlem, turnover, and injuries; and WlI MBAS, pirAIr:rtfon from abusive work environments should apply to every worker. ;and not be limited Io legally protected class statue booed only on raco, color. gleader, national origin, aju. or dlsabIlity. HOW TREREFoRE, SE iT PROCLAIMED, I, Ron Monitor) as mayor of the City of Natianai GAy, byvilritre of the authority vested In me by the City of tallonal City, afila the ix -Motet seal and together with the City Council, do hereby pracl r 16, through Oct ohor22, 2016 as FREEDOM FROM WORKPLACE 8UILLt; a WEEK i, call upon all citizens of the City of National Clty to take a moment to conurtend the California Healthy Workplace Advocates and the Workplace Sullying Institute, which raises awareness of the impacts of, and solutions for, workplace bullying In the U.S. and # =cout a ell citizens to recognize this special observance. Ron Morrison Mayor Homelike Comber ase". Altertliitetelytt Csioulleftegier 9 of 669 CC/CDC-HA Agenda 10/18/2016 — Page 10 The following page(s) contain the backup material for Agenda Item: Interviews and Appointments: Various Boards & Commissions - Current Vacancy (Community and Police Relations Commission) and Expiring Term (Port Commission). (City Clerk) 10 of 669 CITY OF NATIONAL CITY, CALIFORNIA COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT MEETING DATE: October 18, 2016 AGENDA ITEM NO. ITEM TITLE: Interviews and Appointments: Various Boards & Commissions - Current Vacancy (Community and Police Relations Commission) and Expiring Term (Port Commission). (City Clerk) PREPARED BY: Michael R. Dalla PHONE: 619-336-4226 EXPLANATION: See attached background report. FINANCIAL STATEMENT: ACCOUNT NO. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW: DEPARTMENT: City rk APPROVED BY: ORDINANCE: INTRODUCTION: STAFF RECOMMENDATION: lInterview and appoint as desired. FINAL ADOPTION: APPROVED: APPROVED: Finance BOARD / COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION: ATTACHMENTS: 1. Background Report 2. Applications 11 of 669 BOARDS & COMMISSIONS — CURRENT VACANCY (CPRC) and EXPIRING TERM (Port Commission) October 18, 2016 COMMUNITY AND POLICE RELATIONS COMMISSION (CPRC) (Appointing Authority: Mayor subject to confirmation by City Council) There is one unexpired term on the CPRC. There are three new applications (Lance Mirkin, Coyote Moon and Derek Jones). Name Interviewed Lance Mirkin Yes Coyote Moon Yes Derek Jones No PORT COMMISSIONER (Appointing Authority: City Council) The term on National City's Port Commissioner, Robert "Dukie" Valderrama, expires on January 2, 2017. Commissioner Valderrama has requested that he be considered for re -appointment. In accordance with provisions of the Maddy Act and City Council Policy #107, Notice of the Vacancy has been publicly posted and advertised in the Union Tribune. Interested applicants were asked to submit an application by noon on October 17th and to appear for an interview before the City Council on October 18th. At the time of agenda preparation, no applications had been received. It is recommended that any applicants who apply by the deadline be interviewed and the City Council take action to appoint or re -appoint as desired. Re -appointment of Mr. Valderrama will require a 4/5 vote. 12 of 669 CITY OF NATIONAL CITY APPLICATION FOR APPOINTMENT TO CITY .BOARpsi commissigNs• AND '0911111.1OrriliES 4,?4C1v Servite COrnmissfori Plannliv Comtnesion , COM MU* & Police Relations Commission* (CPRC) Public Art Oamrnittee* Min Board of Thialees Tridflo Safety Committee Perks, Recreation 84.Sertior Citizens Atvisory Board Note: Applicents must be reskienh; of the CM, of Rattenal City except for those marked by arc' Applicants for the Community and Police Relations Commission must pass a crindnai background check prior to appointment. Name: -...4khr 4.614 m. E r Home Address: be.41‘..e Tel. ND,: /Alto- fig 7- tiqz-s Bushel's Affillon: Title: Business Address: Tel. No.: Length of Residence in National City: 21 ti• San Diego County f California: i9' Educational Background: %A gb6CJI I /err 1-44.96 Sc.405j tekiletA.. Stitt ' Kivea ez7 sl-hod,•1 Lew Oocupational EXPertence: „„el / f Professional or Technical Organ an Memberships: Civic or Community Experience, Membership, or Previous Public Service Appoirdments: Oa v-01 fit 0-04 fkAk, EI- rirq. ri44.1.4.tcLca,A, 14.A Experience ar Special knowledge Pertaining to Area of Interest Have you ever been convicted of a felony crime? No X.Yes: misdemeanor crime? No:XeYes: if any convictions were expunged declosure is not required. Convictione are not necessarily disqualifying, ' Please feel free to provide an explanation or information regarding yes answenTito abOve two qUeStOnt, dp44-, / /t p Date: p�,'/.6 Sign r‘; Please feel free to provide add oriel- information ar letters of anifirsetpieni. Please return completed form to: Office of the City Clerk 1243 National City Blvd, National City, CA 91950 Thank you for your interest in serving the City of National City. *Residency .1cirements may not apply This cbcunierile is Med as a public donument ReVise0 Datomber2015 13 of 669 Supolitmental .kocilicatitint National City Community and Police Relations Commission The National City Community and Police Relations Commission serves as an independent, unbiased and impartial office that Is readily available to the public. It is an organization for the Improvement of police and community relations and the facilitation .of disputes whenever •possible, it provides a forum for citizens to voice theirconcerns, comment about police conduct, practices and policies and irnproves communication between .citizensand the National City Police Department The National City Community and Police Relations Commission:is empowered to receive andreview complaints regarding National City Police Department Personnel for alleged misconduct, and to recorrrmend appropriate changes of Police Department policies and procedures toward the goals of safeguarding. the rights of persons and promoting higher standards of competency, efficiency and justice In the provision of community policing services. - A►ppiicants must be completely forthright and truthful during the application process. Applicants may be disqualifiediri the background process as a result of dishonesty and/or purposely omitting information regarding one's criminal history. Given the complexity of this Commission and itsduties, it Is necessary to pass a criminal background check prier to appointment by City Council and/or sweating In es Commissioner: Upon conditional appointment the Human Resources department will contact you to schedule the criminal background process when, and it appropriate. It is important to note that you fill out this application completely and honestly to the best of your abilities. Failure to disclose your criminal history may result in disqualification, If a conviction has been expunged disclosure Is not required. Have you ever been convicted of a felony crime: No: ides: Have you been convictedof a misdemeanor: No: Yes: if any convictions were expunged disclosure is not"required. Pleasefeel free to provide an explanation or Information regarding yes answers to the above two questions. There may be circumstances that could disqualify an applicant from the background process beyond the listed crimes below. Each Incident Is evaluated in terms of the circumstances and facts surrounding its occurrence and its degree of relevance to the position: Disqualifying criteria for Community and Police Relations Commissioner ** See attached table 14 of 669 CITY OF NATIONAL .CITY APPLICATION FOR APPOINTMENT �-TO CITY BOARDS, COMMISSIONS, AND COMMJTTEES V/jivi1 Service Commission !�'''Planhing Commission 1, Community & Police Relations Commission" (CPRC) ) ublic Art Committee* V .ibrary Board of Trustees Traffic Safety Committee Parks, Recreation•& Senior Citizens Advisory Board Note: .Applicants must be residents of the City of National City except for those marked by an * Applicants for the Community and Police Relations Commission must pass a tr-iminai bacicground check prior to: appointment. Name: �°0 Home Address: ' 2 ! 87146f- Busineas Affiliation: 72 a Title: Business Address: Tel. Na.: Length of Residence in National City: ► \ Y San Diego County: tY- ifflrnia: Educational Background: • 4. A. yyp 4 n daw_.5 Tel. No.: ‘79:5-0-53173 Occupational Experienoe: f S �I9P!y y. f6(7Wi o ma I/ Professional or Technical Organization Memberships: ij Civic or Community Experience, Membership, or Previous Public Service Appointments: 4-,-- � r6-f-n Experience or Special Knowledge Pertaining to Area of Interest: Have you ever be n convicted of a felony crime? No Yes: misdemeanor crime? No , � Yes: if any convictions were expunged disclosure is not required. Convictions are not necessarily disqualifying. Please feel free to provide an explanation or information regarding yes answers to the above two questions. Date: 20 Signature: Pi ase feel free to provide additional information or letters of endorsement. Please return completed form to: Office of the City Clerk 1243 National City Bind, National city, CA 91950 Thank you for your interest in serving the City of National City. *Residency requirements may not apply This documents is filed as a public documei 15 of 669 Revised: December 2015 Supplemental Application: National City Community and Police Relations Commission The National City Community and Police Relations Commission serves as an independent, unbiased and impartial office that is readily available to the public. It is an organization for the improvement of police and community relations and the facilitation of disputes whenever possible. It provides a forum for citizens to voice their concerns, comment about police conduct, practices and policies and improves communication between citizens and the National City Police Department The National City Community and Police Relations Commission is empowered to receive and review complaints regarding National City Police Department Personnel for alleged misconduct, and to recommend appropriate changes of Police Department policies and procedures toward the goals of safeguarding the rights of persons and promoting higher standards of competency, efficiency and justice in the provision of community policing services. Applicants must be completely forthright and truthful during the application process. Applicants may be disqualified in the background process as a result of dishonesty and/or purposely omitting information regarding one's criminal history. Given the complexity of this Commission and its duties, it is necessary to pass a criminal background check prior to appointment by City Council and/or swearing in as Commissioner. Upon conditional appointment the Human Resources department will contact you to schedule the criminal background process when, and if appropriate. It is important to note that you fill out this application completely and honestly to the best of your abilities. Failure to disclose your criminal history may result in disqualification. If a conviction has been expunged disclosure is not required. Have you ever been convicted of a felony crime: No:,./ -Yes: Have you been convicted of a misdemeanor: No: Yes: If any convictions were expunged disclosure is not required. Please feel free to provide an explanation or information regarding yes answers to the above two q uestions. There may be circumstances that could disqualify an applicant from the background process beyond the listed crimes below. Each incident is evaluated in terms of the circumstances and facts surrounding its occurrence and its degree of relevance to the position. Disqualifying criteria for Community and Police Relations Commissioner: ** See attached table 16 of 669 Name: Horne Address: /133 "E% Pit't dtristrwt (rj TeiNo • Z. /9 F10727/,2 . .: - Business Affiliation: 1144101A4L Cfn 0411 Title: r.t.‘. c4f/14 I?) Business Address: 343 /Welottit—C--ti - Tel No.: 336 Y$3'0 'Length of Residence in National City; "wirill5 S an Diego County: 36 California: 543 Educational Background: ()...1dXj rte.- Cyr •Pv44;iive0;c1 tIte CDTDi etr ,5-Prt:<- Ceti- Occupational Experience: _Ci:f• SjerVt ee- 44- Lre_fa,S ciTYPF,NA33014 TO TO CITY BOARDS, COMMiSSIONS, AND.CONIDIffTTEgS . ChM Seniice Commission Planriing Commission X Community & Police Relations COnvnissione (CPRC) — Public Art Comniittee* tibnary Board of Trustees Traffic Safety Conrunittee - Parks, Recreation & Senior Citizens Advisory Board' Note: Applicants must be residents 011ie pity of National City except for these Marked by an • Applicants fOr the Community and Police Relations Commission .must pass a ethnical •background check prior to appolgtnient. epecr-ic r 3—orte_.1 Profession or Technical Organilation Memberships: Lot.. 7g/4-1 crti:mpt, ci' 1-1 re 54‘ Vcr-5 , Civic or Community Bqaerience, Membership, or Previous Public Servi Appointments: ..,briiailY13 r.r.avuoritV And-. .44lor141Ccki'S r .(je Experience or Speci ,Kno. edge Pertaining to of interest: 10‘. priloAALcri ,cbc- 2..2 yfoks , - Have you ev been convicted of a felony crime. No Ves misdemeanor crime? Noirt Yes: If any convictions were expunged disclosure is not requiredconvictions are not necessarily disquanfying. Please feel free to provide an explanation or information regarding yes answers to the above two questions. bate: . Signature: Please feel free to prOvide additional i ation or letters of endorsement. •Please rattini completed form to: Office of -the City Clerk 1243 National City Blvd, National City, CA 91950 Thank you for your interest in serving.the City of National City. *Residency requirements may not apply. This documents is fled as a public docur Revised: Detember 2015 17 of 669 : Ustiatialionwntao,Avottroation: Natkmal Citv COirmiiMitli arid Polito Relations .Ctmunission The National City Community and Police Relations Commission serves as an independent, unbiased and impartial office that Is readily available to the public. It is an organizafion for the improvement of police and community relations and.the facilitation of disputes wheneverpossible. It provides a forum for citizens to voice their concerns, comment about price conduct, practices and policies and improves communication between citizens and the National Cfty'Police Department The National City Community and Polk>a Relations Commission is empowered to receive and review complaints regarding National City Police Department Personnel for alleged misconduct and to recommend appropriate Changes of Police Department policies and procedures toward the goals of safeguarding the rights of persons and promoting higher standards of competency, efficiency and justice in the provision of community policing services. Appkants must be completely forthright and truthful during the application process. Applicants may be disqualified in the background process as a result of dishonesty andior purposely omitting information regarding one's criminal history. Given the complexity of this Commission and its duties, ft is necessary to pass a criminal background check prior to appointment by City Council and/or swearing in as Commissioner. Upon conditional appointment the Human Resources department will contact you to schedule the criminal background process when, and if appropriate. It is important to note that you fill out this application completely and honestly to the best of your abilities. Failure to disclose your criminal history may result in disqualification. If a conViction has been expunged dWolosure is not required. Have you ever been convicted of a felony crime: No Have you been convicted of a •misdemeanor: No:A, Yes: If any convictions were expunged disclosure is not required. Please feel free to provide an explanation or information regarding yes answers to the above two questions. There may be circumstances that could disqualify an applicant fromthe background process beyond the listed crimes below. Each incident is evaluated in terms of the circumstances and facts surrounding its occurrence and its degree of relevance to the position. Disqualifying criteria for Community and Police Relations Commissioner. See attached table 18 of 669 CC/CDC-HA Agenda 10/18/2016 — Page 19 The following page(s) contain the backup material for Agenda Item: Motion of the City Council of the City of National City approving the waiving of the reading of the text of the Ordinances considered at this meeting and providing that such Ordinances shall be introduced and/or adopted after a reading of the title only. (City Clerk) 19 of 669 Item # 10/18/16 MOTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF NATIONAL CITY APPROVING THE WAIVING OF THE READING OF THE TEXT OF THE ORDINANCES CONSIDERED AT THIS MEETING AND PROVIDING THAT SUCH ORDINANCES SHALL BE INTRODUCED AND/OR ADOPTED AFTER A READING OF THE TITLE ONLY. (City Clerk) 20 of 669 CC/CDC-HA Agenda 10/18/2016 — Page 21 The following page(s) contain the backup material for Agenda Item: Resolution of the City Council of the City of National City establishing General Fund appropriations in the amount of $10,000 per the Sweetwater Authority Letter of Agreement for the City of National City to provide landscape design services for a Water C 21 of 669 CITY OF NATIONAL CITY, CALIFORNIA COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT MEETING DATE: October 18, 2016 AGENDA ITEM NO. ITEM TITLE: Resolution of the City Council of the City of National City establishing General Fund appropriations in the amount of $10,000 per the Sweetwater Authority Letter of Agreement for the City of National City to provide landscape design services for a Water Conservation Demonstration Garden in Kimball Park next to Paradise Creek. PREPARED BY: Stephen Manganiello PHONE: 619-336 -4382 EXPLANATION: See attached. DEPARTMENT: gineer'ng/Public Works APPROVED BY: FINANCIAL STATEMENT: APPROVED: ACCOUNT NO. APPROVED: 296-409-500-598-6192 (Paradise Creek Water Conservation Garden) ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW: NIA ORDINANCE: INTRODUCTION: FINAL ADOPTION: Finance MIS STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Adopt the Resolution establishing General Fund appropriations in the amount of $10,000 per the Sweetwater Authority Letter of Agreement for the City of National City to provide landscape design services for a Water Conservation Demonstration Garden in Kimball Park next to Paradise Creek. BOARD / COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION: NIA ATTACHMENTS: 1. Exp!anation 2. SWA Letter Agreement 3. Resolution 22 of 669 EXPLANATION On May 25, 2016, the Governing Board of Sweetwater Authority (SWA) authorized payment to the City of National City in a not to exceed amount of $10,000 to reimburse the City for developing conceptual landscape designs with public art elements for a Water Conservation Demonstration Garden in Kimball Park next to Paradise Creek. On June 16, 2016, the City Manager executed the attached Letter of Agreement with SWA for this initial phase of the project. The City has contracted with A Reason to Survive (ARTS) and Kimley-Horn & Associates to assist with development of the conceptual design and preliminary cost estimates, which will be presented to SWA's Governing Board and City Council within the next few months. SWA's Governing Board will then consider whether or not to authorize funding for final design, engineering and construction. Staff is requesting Council authorization to establish General Fund appropriations to pay for design services up to $10,000, which will then be reimbursed by SWA consistent with terms of the letter Agreement. SWA Water Conservation Demonstration Garden in El Cajon, CA 23 of 669 SWEETWATER AUTHORITY 5C6 GARRETT AVENUE POST OFFICE BOX 2328 CHULA VISTA, CALIFORNIA 91912-2929 MO) 4420-1413 FAX (619) 425.7409 httpd/Vontswealsvater.org June 13,2016 Kuna M uthusamy, P.E. Assistant Director of Engineering & Public Works Engineering & Public Works Department 1243 National Clty Boulevard National City, CA 919504301 Re: Letter of Agreement for Landscape Design Services Dear Mr. Muthusamy: GOVERNING eon t0TAI UM%CHAR TERESA'TERRY' I IDIMS, MECHM STEVE Cr STANEDA JOsdF.Cao NON MORRISON OSE MOM) AEse VAN BEVENTFN ARM L BMYIy GENERAL MANA96R AGSMS H. WINE AAuvr (SAL IIAR On May 25, 2016, the Governing Board of Sweetwater Authority authorized payment to the City of National City (City) for conceptual landscape design services (See Attachment A). Sweetwater Authority's (Authority) contribution will be used for actual costs incurred In an amount not to exceed $10,000. In exchange for a sum not to exceed S10,000 the City will produce conceptual landscape designs fora water conservation demonstration garden In the southerly portion of Kimball Park along Paradise Creek in the area generally shown on Attachment B. During the performance of this agreement, each Party agrees to protect save, defend and hold harmless the other Party, and its Board and each member of the Board, directors, officers, agents, and employees from any and all claims, liability, expenses, or damages of any nature, including attorneys' fees, arising out of or in any way connected with negligent acts, errors, or omissions, or willful misconduct performance under this agreement by the other Party, its agents, officers employees, or Consultants. However, neither Party shall be indemnified hereunder for any loss, liability, damage, or expense resulting from Its sole negligence, willful misconduct or active negligence. If you have any questions, please co Petact me at (619) 409-6702. Please have an authorized agent of the City sign below to stipulate agreement with this letter. Sincerely, Jennifer Sabine Assistant General Manager Approved by City: (PILtSIIli Signature i *Dimme, Print Name Date Title Pub& Wit rAgent &ming National City, Cie& rut, and Bonita 24 of 669 Sweetwater Auodty Governing Board Minutes- May 25, 2010 Page d of 10 fiscal year Work Plan results. Ms. Sabine responded that staff provided the results of the first half of this fiscal year to the Board in January 2016, and will attempt to provide the full year results as soon as practical following June 2018. This was an information item only. 7 Local Water Conservation Demonstration Garden — Kimball Park, National City (Finance and Personnel Committee Meeting of May 18, 2016, item 4. A.) Recommendation: Authorize payment in the amount of $10,000 to the City of National City to develop conceptual plans for a local water conservation demonstration garden at !Umball Park; and allocate $10,000 from the Expense Contingency Fund. Assistant General Manager Sabine stated that the Governing Board directed staff to further pursue a partnership plan for a local water conservation demonstration garden with the County of San Diego at the South Bay Regional Center adjacent to the Authority's Administration Office a and with the City of National City at the Kimball Park site. Staff is continuing to pursue both partnership opportunities. The focus of this item is only regarding the project with the City of National City (City). The City is currently implementing a project to restore the Paradise Creek Channel along the southerly portion of Kimball Park. This project provides an opportunity to incorporate a community water conservation demonstration garden adjacent to the creek. The City has indicated that it requires $10,000 in order to provide a design plan for a garden that will help determine the cost of constructing the garden and ongoing maintenance. Upon completing the plan, staff would submit the final plan to the Board for review and approval prior to proceeding with the project. Director Cerda stated he is concerned with this expenditure without having the knowledge of future costs. Chair Zamudio stated that he understands that the $10,000 is for the development of a plan only, and that it would be provided to the Board for review and approval before proceeding_ Ms. Sabine confirmed this. Di actor Castaneda made a motion, seconded by Director Freciado, that the Governing Board authorize payment to the amount of $10.000 to the City of National City to develop conceptual_plans for a local water conservetiorade► ronstr . { ardenn at Kimball Park: and allocate $1O.O00 from the Expense Contingent, Fund. The r €otton carrtede with Director Cards opposing. 8. Review of Board Policy 511 (Finance and Personnel Committee Meeting of May 18, 2016, Item 4. B. ) Recommendation: Maintain the Local Government Commission in the list of organizations in Policy 511, but revise the policy to state Vital a conference or educational program curriculum shall be presented to the Board for review and consideration for organizations that require per diem approval for Directors' attendance. Director Prep ado stated that he supports maintaining the Local C-ovemment Commission as currently listed in Policy 511 as long es the agendas of arty events are provided to the Board in advance. Director Thomas asked for some additional items to be addressed; however, Chair Zannudio responded that she needs to submit these to the General Manager for future review by the Finance and Personnel Committee as they are not related to the specific issue cf this agenda item. 25 of 669 tuoxsapici alfrevni: nor AVM N3aaV0 NOLLVAN381100 Win%• NSW T1V811W 00Z 9 G J314 NI MVOS :AMMO O uesuaaotnnoi 26 of 669 RESOLUTION NO. 2016 — RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF NATIONAL CITY ESTABLISHING A GENERAL FUND APPROPRIATION IN THE AMOUNT OF $10,000 PER THE SWEETWATER AUTHORITY LETTER OF AGREEMENT FOR THE CITY OF NATIONAL CITY TO PROVIDE LANDSCAPE DESIGN SERVICES FOR A WATER CONSERVATION DEMONSTRATION GARDEN IN KIMBALL PARK NEXT TO PARADISE CREEK WHEREAS, on May 25, 2016, the Governing Board of Sweetwater Authority ("SWA") authorized payment to the City of National City in the not to exceed amount of $10,000 for the City to develop conceptual landscape designs with public art elements for a Water Conservation Demonstration Garden in Kimball Park next to Paradise Creek; and WHEREAS, on June 6, the City Manager signed a Letter of Agreement between Sweetwater Authority and the City of National City setting forth the terms and conditions, including a mutual hold harmless indemnity; and WHEREAS, the City contracted with A Reason to Survive ("ARTS") and Kimley- Horn & Associates to assist with development of the conceptual design and preliminary cost estimates, which will be presented to SWA s Governing Board to consider whether or not to authorize funding for the final design, engineering, and construction; and WHEREAS, an appropriation to the General Fund in the not to exceed amount of $10,000 needs to be established to pay for design services. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of National City hereby authorizes the establishment of a General Fund appropriation in the amount of $10,000 for funds from Sweetwater Authority for the City to provide landscape design services for a Water Conservation Demonstration Garden in Kimball Park next to Paradise Creek. PASSED and ADOPTED this 18th day of October, 2016. ATTEST: Michael R. Dalla, City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: George H. Eiser, ill Interim City Attorney Ron Morrison, Mayor 27 of 669 CC/CDC-HA Agenda 10/18/2016 — Page 28 The following page(s) contain the backup material for Agenda Item: Resolution of the City Council of the City of National City, 1) awarding a contract in the not -to -exceed amount of $99,759.00 to Portillo Concrete, Inc. for the E. 16th Street and Grove Street Pedestrian Enhancements Project, CIP No. 16-03; 2) authorizing 28 of 669 CITY OF NATIONAL CITY, CALIFORNIA COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT MEETING DATE: October 18, 2016 AGENDA ITEM NO. I ITEM TITLE: Resolution of the City Council of the City of National City, 1) awarding a contract in the not -to -exceed amount of $99,759.00 to Portlllo Concrete, Inc. for the E. 16th Street and Grove Street Pedestrian Enhancements Project, CIP No. 16-03; 2) authorizing a 15% contingency in the amount of $14,963.85 for any unforeseen changes; and 3) authorizing the Mayor to execute the contract. j PREPARED BY Cruz Ruelas-Avila PHONE: 1336-43871 EXPLANATION: See attached.1 DEPARTMENT: jEngineering/Public Works APPROVED BY: FINANCIAL STATEMENT: APPROVED: ACCOUNT NO. APPROVED: Funding available through prior City Council appropriations: 307-409-500-598-6166 (TransNet Prop A — Safe Routes to School) ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW: ORDINANCE: INTRODUCTION: 1 FINAL ADOPTION: Finance MIS STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Adopt the Resolution. BOARD / COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION: (N/A1 ATTACHMENTS: 1. Explanation 2. Bid Opening Summary 3. Three Lowest Bidders Summary 4. Resolution 29 of 669 EXPLANATION The E. 16th Street and Grove Street Pedestrian Enhancements Project, GIP No. 16-03, includes the following pedestrian and Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) enhancements for the intersection of E. 16th Street and Grove Street: removal and replacement of existing curb, gutter, sidewalk and curb ramps, AC overlay, AC paving, slurry seal, high intensity signing and striping, and corner bulb -outs for traffic calming. On August 24, 2016, the bid solicitation was posted on PlanetBids, a free public electronic bidding system for contractors. On August 24 and August 31, 2016, the bid solicitation was advertised in local newspapers. On September 13, 2016, six (6) bids were received electronically on PlanetBids by the 1:00 p.m. deadline. Bid results were available immediately after the 1:00 p.m. deadline. Portillo Concrete, Inc. was the apparent low bidder with a total bid amount of $99,759.00. Upon review of all documents submitted and reference checks, Portillo Concrete, Inc.'s bid is responsive, and they are the lowest responsible bidder qualified to perform the work as described in the project specifications. Attached are the bid opening results and a summary of the three lowest bidders for your information. Staff recommends awarding a contract in the not to exceed amount of $99,759.00 to Portillo Concrete, Inc. for the E. 16th Street and Grove Street Pedestrian Enhancements Project, CIP No. 16-03, and authorizing a 15% contingency in the amount of $14,963.85 for unforeseen changes that may arise. This project is funded through existing TransNet Prop A appropriations. 30 of 669 NAME: CIP NO: DATE: TIME: -0 - CALIFORNIA +-0- NIN L city mcoRpoamrsp BID OPENING RESULTS E. 16th Street and Grove Street Pedestrian Enhancements 16-03 Tuesday, September 13, 2016 1:00 P.M. ESTIMATE: $110,000.00 PROJECT ENGINEER: Stephen Manganiello NO. BIDDER'S NAME BID AMOUNT BID SECURITY -CHECK -BOND 1. Portillo Concrete Inc. 3527 Citrus St Lemon Grove, CA 91945 $99,759.00 Bond 2, Crest Equipment, Inc. 161 Scottford Drive El Cajon, CA 92021 $99,783.75 Bond 3. Just Construction, Inc. 3103 Market Street San Diego, CA 92102 $109,888.10 Bond 4: Vailston Company 774 N. Twin Oaks Valley Road, Suite C San Marcos, CA 92069 $112,478.00 Bond 5. A.B. Hashmi, Inc. 13066 Deer Canyon Court San Diego, CA 92131 $121,507.50 Bond 6. Blue Pacific Engineering & C 13066 Deer Canyon Court San Diego, CA 92131 $138,354.75 Bond 31 of 669 Bid Results for E. 16th Street and Grove Street Pedestrian Enhancements (CIP 16-03) Portillo Concrete, Inc. Crest Equipment, Inc. Just Construction, Inc. Base Bid Item No. Description Unit Qty. Unit Price Extension (Quantityx Unit Price) Unit Price Extension (Quantityx Unit Price) Unit Price Extension (Quantityx Unit Price 1 Mobilization LS 1 $1,000.00 $1,000.00 $2,550.00 $2,550 00 $7,490.00 $7,490.00 2 3 Traffic Control LS 1 $2,000.00 $2,000.00 $5,800.00 $5,800.00 $3,745.00 $3,745 00 Surveying LS 1 $2,000.00 $2,000.00 $2,100.00 $2,100 00 $2,782.00 $2,782.00 4 Water Pollution Control LS 1 $500.00 $500.00 $1,200.00 $1,200.00 $1,284.00 $1,284.00 5 Clearing and Grubbing LS 1 $2,000.00 $2,000.00 $5,500.00 $5,500.00 $3,745.00 $3,745.00 6 Untreated Base CY 83 $25.00 $2,075.00 $65.00 $5,395.00 $42.80 $3,552.40 7 Construct Asphalt Concrete Overlay (Variable Thickness) SF 900 $12.00 $10,800.00 $9.00 $8,100 00 _ $4.30 $3,870.00 g Construct Asphalt Concrete Pavement TON 85 $165.00 $14,025.00 $225.00 $19,125.00 $271.80 $23,103.00 9 Slurry Seal (Type II) TON 12 $1,800.00 $21,600.00 $1,000.00 $12,000 00 $1,613.60 $19,363.20 10 6" PCC Curb and Gutter (SDIRSD G-2) LF 173 $30.00 $5,190.00 $36.00 $6,228 00 $19.30 $3,338.90 11 PCC Cross Gutter (SDRSO G-12 SF 560 $15.00 $8,400.00 $13.75 $7,700.00 $12.80 $7,168.00 12 4" PCC Sidewalk (SDRSD G-7) SF 1441 $9.00 $12,969 00 . $5.75 $8,285.75 $8.60 $12,392.60 13 Curb Ramp EA 2 $3,000.00 $6,000.00 $2,500.00 $5,000.00 $3,424.00 L $6,848.00 14 Signing and Striping LS 1 $6,200.00 $6,200.00 $5,800.00 $5,800.00 $6,206.00 $6,206.00 15 Field Orders AL 1 $5,000.00 $5,000.00 $5,000.00 $5,000.00 $5,000.00 $5,000.00 Base Bid 'Total $99,759.00 $99,783.75 $109,888.10 32 of 669 RESOLUTION NO. 2016 — RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF NATIONAL CITY AWARDING A CONTRACT IN THE NOT -TO -EXCEED AMOUNT OF $99,759.00 TO PORTILLO CONCRETE, INC., FOR THE EAST 16TH STREET AND GROVE STREET PEDESTRIAN ENHANCEMENTS PROJECT, AUTHORIZING A 15% CONTINGENCY IN THE AMOUNT OF $14,963.85 FOR ANY UNFORESEEN CHANGES, AND AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR TO EXECUTE THE CONTRACT WHEREAS, the East 16' Street and Grove Street Pedestrian Enhancements Project includes the following pedestrian and Americans with Disabilities Act ("ADA") enhancements for the intersection of East 16th Street and Grove Street: removal and replacement of existing curb, gutter, sidewalk and curb ramps, AC overlay, AC paving, slurry seal, high intensity signing and striping, and corner bulb -outs for traffic calming; and WHEREAS, on September 13, 2016, six (6) bids were received electronically on PlanetBids by the 1:00 p.m. deadline; and WHEREAS, Portillo Concrete, Inc., was the lowest responsive bidder qualified to perform the work as described in the project specifications with a total bid amount of $99,759.00; and NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of National City hereby awards the contract for the East 16" Street and Grove Street Pedestrian Enhancements Project to the lowest responsive, responsible bidder, to wit: PORTILLO CONCRETE, INC. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of National City that the Mayor is hereby authorized to execute on behalf of the City a contract in the amount of $99,759.00 with Portillo Concrete, Inc., for the East 16th Street and Grove Street Pedestrian Enhancements Project. Said contract is on file in the office of the City Clerk. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City Council hereby authorizes a 15% contingency amount up to $14,963.85 for any unforeseen changes to the Project. PASSED and ADOPTED this 18" day of October, 2016. Ron Morrison, Mayor ATTEST: APPROVED AS TO FORM: Michael R. Dalla, City Clerk George H. Eiser, III Interim City Attorney 33 of 669 CC/CDC-HA Agenda 10/18/2016 — Page 34 The following page(s) contain the backup material for Agenda Item: Resolution of the City Council of the City of National City authorizing the appropriation of $70,000.00 in the Plaza Boulevard Widening CIP expenditure account from Transportation Development Impact Fee (TDIF) fund balance for construction of the Plaza Bo 34 of 669 CITY OF NATIONAL CITY, CALIFORNIA COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT MEETING DATE: October 18, 2016 AGENDA ITEM NO. ITEM TITLE: Resolution of the City; Council of the City of National City authorizing the appropriation of $70,000.00 in the Plaza Boulevard Widening CIP expenditure account from Transportation Development Impact Fee (TDIF) fund balance for construction of the Plaza Boulevard Widening Project. PREPARED BY: Stephen Manganiello PHONE: 619-336-4382 EXPLANATION: See attached. FINANCIAL STATEMENT: ACCOUNT NO. 325-409-500-598-6569 (Plaza Blvd Widening) ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW: NIA ORDINANCE: INTRODUCTION: FINAL ADOPTION: DEPARTMENT: Engineering/Public Works APPROVED BY: APPROVED: APPROVED: Finance MIS STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Adopt Resolution authorizing the appropriation of $70,000.00 in the Plaza Boulevard Widening CIP expenditure account from TDIF fund balance for construction of the Plaza Boulevard Widening Project. BOARD 1 COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION: NIA ATTACHMENTS: 1. Explanation 2. Resolution 35 of 669 EXPLANATION On February 2, 2016, through adoption of Resolution No. 2016-15, City Council awarded a contract to Dick Miller. Inc. in the not -to -exceed amount of $1,894,498.10 for the Plaza Boulevard Widening "N" Avenue to 1-805 project, CIP No. 16-01, and authorized a 15% contingency in the amount of $284,174.72 for any unforeseen changes. The base contract is funded through Transportation Development Impact Fees (TDIF), Capital Outlay and TransNet (Prop A). The project's 15% contingency was not appropriated into the project. TDIF funds are designated exclusively for the Plaza Boulevard Widening "N" Avenue to 1-805 project, CIP No. 16-01, therefore, staff is requesting that City Council authorize the appropriation of $70,000.00 in the Plaza Boulevard Widening CIP expenditure account from TDIF fund balance to address unforeseen conditions discovered during construction of the Plaza Boulevard Widening Project. The appropriation of the TDIF funds to the project falls well within the base contract and contingency amounts previously approved by City Council. Additionally, using TDIF funds will reduce the burden on the other funds in the project, which would then be freed up for other uses. The project is scheduled to be completed by March 2017 36 of 669 RESOLUTION NO. 2016 — RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF NATIONAL CITY AUTHORIZING THE APPROPRIATION OF $70,000.00 TO THE PLAZA BOULEVARD WIDENING CIP EXPENDITURE ACCOUNT FROM THE TRANSPORTATION DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEE (TDIF) FUND BALANCE FOR CONSTRUCTION OF THE PLAZA BOULEVARD WIDENING PROJECT WHEREAS, on February 2, 2016, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 2016- 15 awarding a contract to Dick Miller, Inc., in the not -to -exceed amount of $1,894,498.10 for the Plaza Boulevard Widening "N" Avenue to 1-805 Project, and authorized a 15°/° contingency in the amount of $284,174.72 for any unforeseen changes; and WHEREAS, an appropriation in the amount of $70,000.00 to the Plaza Boulevard Widening CIP expenditure account from the TDIF fund balance is necessary to address unforeseen conditions discovered during construction of the Plaza Boulevard Widening Project. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of National City hereby authorizes an appropriation in the amount of $70,000 to the Plaza Boulevard Widening CIP Expenditure Account from the Transportation Development Impact Fee fund balance for construction of the Plaza Boulevard Widening Project. PASSED and ADOPTED this 18th day of October, 2016. ATTEST: Michael R. Dalla, City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: George H. Eiser, III Interim City Attorney Ron Morrison, Mayor 37 of 669 CC/CDC-HA Agenda 10/18/2016 — Page 38 The following page(s) contain the backup material for Agenda Item: Resolution of the City Council of the City of National City authorizing the appropriation of $95,000.00 in the corresponding CIP expenditure accounts for Kimball Park & El Toyon Park Improvements from Park Development Impact Fee fund balance to be allocat 38 of 669 CITY OF NATIONAL CITY, CALIFORNIA COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT MEETING DATE: October 18, 2016 AGENDA ITEM NO. ITEM TITLE: Resolution of the City Council of the City of National City authorizing the appropriation of $95,000.00 in the corresponding CIP expenditure accounts for Kimball Park & El Toyon Park Improvements from Park Development Impact Fee fund balance to be allocated to the City Council approved 15% contingency for construction of the Kimball Park & El Toyon Park improvements Project. PREPARED BY: Stephen Manganiello DEPARTMENT: inee ing/Public Works PHONE: 619-336-4382 APPROVED BY: EXPLANATION: See attached. FINANCIAL STATEMENT: APPROVED: ACCOUNT NO. APPROVED: 325-409-500-598-4131 (El Toyon Park Improvements CIP): $45,000.00 325-409-500-598-4132 (Kimball Park Improvements CIP): $50,000.00 ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW: WA ORDINANCE: INTRODUCTION: FINAL ADOPTION: Finance MIS STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Adopt Resolution authorizing the appropriation of $95,000.00 in the corresponding CIP expenditure accounts for Kimball Park & El Toyon Park Improvements from Park Development Impact Fee fund balance. BOARD 1 COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION: NfA ATTACHMENTS: 1. Explanation 2. Resolution 39 of 669 EXPLANATION On September 1, 2015, through adoption of Resolution No. 2015-136, City Council awarded a contract to Western Rim Constructors, inc. in the not -to -exceed amount of $3,452,342.98 for the Kimball Park, El Toyon Park, and Kimball Skate Park Improvements Project, CIP No. 15-04, and authorized a 15% contingency in the amount of $517,851.45 for any unforeseen changes. The project's 15% contingency Was not appropriated into the project. Improvements for Kimball Park include implementation of storm water low -impact development measures, new restrooms, lighting, "state-of-the-art" skate park, central plaza, benches, trash receptacles, public safety cameras, Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) upgrades, walking paths, and drought tolerant landscaping. Improvements for El Toyon Park include new restrooms, lighting, public safety cameras, ADA upgrades, and programmable metal swing gates for the "horseshoe" parking lot. Resulting from unforeseen conditions, to date, expenditures and encumbrances for the project equal $3,525,222.75, resulting in the need to use a portion of the City Council approved 15% contingency. Therefore, staff is requesting that City Council authorize the appropriation of $95,000.00 in the corresponding ClP expenditure accounts in contingency for Kimball Park & El Toyon Park Improvements from Park Development Impact Fee (DIF) fund balance for construction of the Kimball Park & El Toyon Park Improvements Project. DIF funds will only be used to pay for new and/or expansion of park facilities. The project is scheduled to be completed by December 2016. 40 of 669 RESOLUTION NO. 2016 — RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF NATIONAL CITY AUTHORIZING THE APPROPRIATION OF $95,000.00 IN THE CORRESPONDING CIP EXPENDITURE ACCOUNTS FOR KIMBALL PARK AND EL TOYON PARK IMPROVEMENTS FROM THE PARK DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEE FUND BALANCE FOR CONTINUING CONSTRUCTION OF THE KIMBALL PARK AND EL TOYON PARK IMPROVEMENTS PROJECT WHEREAS, on September 1, 2015, through adoption of Resolution No. 2015- 136, City Council awarded a contract to Western Rim Constructors, Inc., in the not -to -exceed amount of $3,452,342.98 for the Kimball Park, El Toyon Park, and Kimball Skate Park Improvements Project and authorized a 15% contingency in the amount of $517,851.45 for any unforeseen changes; and WHEREAS, improvements for Kimball Park include implementation of storm water low -impact development measures, new restrooms, lighting, "state-of-the-art" skate park, central plaza, benches, trash receptacles, public safety cameras, Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) upgrades, walking paths, and drought tolerant landscaping; and WHEREAS, improvements for El Toyon Park include new restrooms, lighting, public safety cameras, ADA upgrades, and programmable metal swing gates for the "horseshoe" parking lot; and WHEREAS, an appropriation of $95,000.00 in the corresponding CIP expenditure accounts for Kimball Park and El Toyon Park Improvements from the Park Development Impact Fee (DIF) fund balance is necessary to continue construction of the Kimball Park and El Toyon Park Improvements Project. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of National City hereby authorizes the appropriation of $95,000.00 in the corresponding CIP expenditure accounts for Kimball Park and El Toyon Park Improvements from the Park Development Impact Fee fund balance for construction of the Kimball Park and El Toyon Park Improvements Project. PASSED and ADOPTED this 18Th day of October, 2016. ATTEST: Michael R. Dalla, City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: George H. Eiser, III Interim City Attorney Ron Morrison, Mayor 41 of 669 CC/CDC-HA Agenda 10/18/2016 — Page 42 The following page(s) contain the backup material for Agenda Item: Resolution of the City Council of the City of National City authorizing the appropriation of $75,000 in the Traffic Monitoring CIP expenditure account from General Fund fund balance to conduct Citywide Engineering & Traffic Surveys to establish speed limi 42 of 669 CITY OF NATIONAL CITY, CALIFORNIA COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT MEETING DATE: October 18, 2016 AGENDA ITEM NO. ITEM TITLE° Resolution of the City Council of the City of National City authorizing the appropriation of $75,000 in the Traffic Monitoring CIP expenditure account from General Fund fund balance to conduct Citywide Engineering & Traffic Surveys to establish speed limits in accordance with Section 40802(a) of the California Vehicle Code. PREPARED BY.' Stephen Manganiello PHONE: 619-336-4382 EXPLANATION: See attached. FINANCIAL STATEMENT: ACCOUNT NO. APPROVED: DEPARTMENT: Engineering/Public Works APPROVED BY: APPROVED: MIS Expenditure account: 001-409-500-598-6573 (Traffic Monitoring CIP) Note: National City's share of revenues collected by the San Diego Superior Court - South County Division are deposited into the General Fund, which contributes to the fund balance. Since a significant portion of these revenues are generated from payment of traffic fines, use of these revenues to conduct engineering and traffic surveys for establishing speed limits to allow for continued enforcement, which includes issuing citations for traffic violations, is appropriate. ENVIRCi 1MENTAL REVIEW: N/A ORDINANCE: INTRODUCTION: FINAL ADOPTION: Finance STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Adopt Resolution authorizing the appropriation of $75,000 in the Traffic Monitoring CIP expenditure account from General Fund Revenue account number 001-11000-3200 to conduct Citywide Engineering & Traffic Surveys. BOARD / COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION N/A ATTACHMENTS: 1. Explanation 2. Proposal to conduct and certify Citywide engineering & traffic surveys 3. Roadway segments recommended for survey 4. Resolution 43 of 669 Explanation In order for National City Police Officers to conduct radar speed enforcement, engineering and traffic surveys must be performed every five years in accordance with Section 40802(a) of the California Vehicle Code (CVC) and Chapter 2B of the California Department of Transportation Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices. In addition, officers must have successfully completed a radar operator course of not less than 24 hours, approved and certified by the Commission on Peace Officer Standards and Training, and the radar, laser or other electronic device used to measure vehicle speeds must be properly calibrated and meet or exceed the minimal operational standards of the National Traffic Highway Safety Administration. The last Citywide engineering and traffic surveys tor establishing speed limits were conducted and certified by Kimley-Hom and Associates, Inc. approximately five years ago, and subsequently amended into Section 11.16.010 "Speed Zones Designated" of the National City Municipal Code by Ordinance of the City Council. Therefore, new surveys must be conducted and certified in order to remain in compliance with CVC 40802(a) and allow for continued radar speed enforcement. Kimley-Horn & Associates has submitted a proposal to conduct and certify new engineering and traffic surveys to establish speed limits along 150 roadway segments in National City for a not to exceed amount of approximately $75,000. See attached table of roadway segments recommended for survey. This effort would be completed under the City's on - call engineering contract with Kimley-Horn and Associates. Staff is requesting that City Council authorize the appropriation of $75,000 in the Traffic Monitoring CIP expenditure account from General Fund fund balance to conduct Citywide Engineering & Traffic Surveys to establish speed limits in accordance with Section 40802(a) of the California Vehicle Code. National City's share of revenues collected by the San Diego Superior Court - South County Division are deposited into the General Fund through revenue account no. 001- 11000-3200 "Vehicle Code Fines." National City receives, on average, approximately $150,000 in revenues annually. A significant portion of these revenues are generated from payment of traffic fines. Therefore, use of these revenues to conduct engineering and traffic surveys for establishing speed limits to allow for continued enforcement, which includes issuing citations for traffic violations, is appropriate. 44 of 669 Kim ey » Horn September 20, 2016 Mr. Stephen Manganiello City of National City 1243 National City Boulevard National City, CA 91950 RE: Engineering and Traffic Surveys to Establish Speed Limits Dear Mr. Manganieilo: Kimley-Horn and Associates ("Kimley-Horn" or "Consultant') is pleased to submit this letter agreement to the City of National City ("City") for providing professional services related to the Engineering and Traffic Surveys ("Project"). Project Understanding Speed limits are generally established based on the 85th percentile speed, which is defined as the speed at or below which 85 percent of traffic is moving. Engineering and Traffic Surveys are intended to serve as the basis for the establishment and enforcement of speed limits for street segments within the City of National City. These surveys for speed limits are conducted once every five years to comply with Section 40802(a) of the CVC and the national Uniform Vehicle Code. Surveys may be extended to every seven or ten years if a registered engineer evaluates the section of the highway and determines that no significant changes in roadway or traffic conditions have occurred. The last Engineering and Traffic Surveys were completed in 2011. _To comply with the. Vehicle Codes, National City i_s_lookirig t conduct new Engineering and Traffic. Surveys to establish speed limits on City roadway segments. Kiimley-Horn has prepared a scope and fee to assist the City with the completion of the Engineering and Traffic Surveys. The scope of work is described below. Kimsey -Horn will contract with the following sub consultants: • National Data & Surveying Services (NDS) - (Data Collection) Scope of Services Task 1: Data Collection The Engineering and Traffic Surveys require the following information • Radar Speed Surveys • 48-hour Average Daily Traffic (ACT) • Collision Data (A minimum of two years) • Functional Usage Kimley-Horn will coordinate with the City to determine the roadway segment locations (scope assumes up to 150 locations). Kimley-Horn will then coordinate with NDS to collect radar speed surveys and ADT counts at up to 150 locations. Radar and counts will be conducted on days with fair weather, dry pavement, and clear visibility. Kimley-Horn will review the City of National City's General Plan to 1 iril4YpiTe1'dettiFiiiii I. p'dv� ll iF ." 45 of 669 Kerniey»>HQrn Page 2 determine the functional classification of each roadway segment. It is assumed that up to thwo years of collision data wi1I be provided by the City for all roadway segments. Kimley—Horn will then review the provided collision data for corridor related collisions. Task 2: Field Review Kimely-Horn will drive each roadway segment with prevailing traffic to determine the speed of traffic that is reasonable from the driver's viewpoint. While In the field, Kimley-Horn will verify and note a variety of roadway characteristics including; the roadway cross section, roadside development, the number and location of driveways, presence of parked vehicles, emergency shoulder areas, adjacent schools and playgrounds, pedestrian and bicycle activity, horizontal and vertical alignment, intersection spacing, visibility and control, and landscaping. Task 3: Documentation Kimley-Horn will prepare a final report documenting the results of the data collection and field review efforts. The report will also propose a final recommended speed limit and document the Engineering and Traffic Survey for each roadway segment. Task 4: Project Coordination, Meetings, and Management Kimley-Horn will perform project management and administration services consisting of invoicing (with associated back up) and monitoring progress against budget throughout the duration of the project. Due to the nature of the project, it is not expected that coordination meetings between the City and Kimley-Horn will be needed for this project. Kiraley-Horn will prepare sub-consultent agreements fox required Subco ls"Ultant services: T11i5: task WII1 also consist of: monitoring Subconsuitant progress against budget and schedule, and reviewing subconsultant invoices and associated back up. Additional Services The following' services are not included in the scope of services, but can be provided as additional services if authorized by the City. If authorized, Kimley-Horn will submit a proposal for additional services based on a lump sum fee using the same billing rates per the original agreement. • Attendance of meetings • Additional data collection efforts • Additional roadway segments Information Provided By Client We shall be entitled to rely on the completeness and accuracy of information provided by the Client. The. Client will provide information requested by Kimley-Horn during the project. Information provided by the client will be as follows: • Signed notice to proceed d Collision Data :, 1:0 t lli.1 03t A) 11)fil i'.:j OiitP, r lit" liJ M PI.D11 ? Z EiAtit 8 ! r`��.:� .was �,_f . .><1; 46 of 669 {�y Kinniey* Horn Page 3 Schedule We will provide our services as expeditiously as practicable to meet a mutually agreed upon schedule. it is expected that the data collection efforts will be conducted between October 10, 2016 and November 11, 2016 when the National City School District and Sweetwater Union High School District are in session. Fee and Billing Kirnley-Horn will perform the scope of services outlined above on a time and materials basis, not to exceed $74,457. Fees will be invoiced monthly based upon the percentage of services performed as of the invoice date. Payment will be due within 30 days of the date of the invoice. Very truly yours, KIMLEY-HORN -:%r• L7C - - - l.ea EspeI t> P. E;, T. E. -Project-Manager_...._. Dennis Landaal, P.E. -Senior Vice President riak ili),..w-ox . Loi 4t,}4-14t> ii : i 47 of 669 Engineering and Traffic Surveys to Establish Speed Limits 9122/2016 )4,,m1e Hoxn hilt" t1ru1gr.Hont- RSAet' , - Senior Tech. Advisor Senior Professional Professional Senior Designer Analyst Technician Support Staff Task Description 3240.00 5195.00 5165.00 5160.00 5135.00 5125.a0 585.00 • Task 1- Data Collection 0 0 0 - 0 0 0 D 0 5 6140.00 S 21,00000. $ 26;940.00 6 21,800:00 Radar Speed Surveys &AOT 0 S 21,800.00 NOS Coordne0oliwoNNDS 2 10 12 $ 1,720,00 5 1,720.00 3 3.220.00 Roadway Classiiicalian-& Col0sion Dela Review 2 10 20 32 3 3:420.00 Task 2 - Field Rey1ew 0 2 0. 0 00 0 60 102 $ 17,970:00 ; - 1 17,470410 Driving the Streets 2 i B0 60 162 $ 17,370.00 5 17,970,00 Task.-Dosumentatlon 0 0 0l D 160 0 0 150 S 26;900,04 ; - 26,70000 Prepare.Technicai Report 150 150 3 20,250.00 5 20,250.00 Quality Control 20 10 30 k . 5050.00 S 5,05000 ;S - 1146,00 TaSk4-ProjeCt Management - 0 4 4 0 0 0 4 12 'S. 1,740.00 S - Project Coordinalbn and Adniinistra5on 4 41 4 12 $ _ 1,740.00. S 1,740.00 Expenses .; 2,607.00 Total 13Wrrndedtoahenearot-$'I( _ ._. _.-.. ; ...,..-. ,, ,. ....,. ``�. • 5 ..IllatlilliMIIIE111111111.11111211116111EVII`.-, -D' .'. IMITIM111111101111 so'fG0.00$21,.'j.. -•. ..". ..:=.... , .S - 4 J....,, ROADWAY SEGMENTS RECOMMENDED FOR SURVEY Location Number Location Name Limits 1 Harbor Drive North city limit to 8th Street 2 Harbor Drive 8th Street to Civic Center Drive 3 Tidelands Avenue Civic Center Drive to 19th Street 4 Tidelands Avenue 19th Street to Bay Marina Drive 5 Tidelands Avenue Bay Marina Drive to 32nd Street 6 Marina Way Bay Marina Drive to 32nd Street 7 Cleveland Avenue Civic Center Drive to 19th Street 8 Cleveland Avenue 19th Street to Bay Marina Drive 9 McKinley Avenue 14th Street to 19th Street 10 McKinley Avenue 19th Street to 23rd Street 11 Wilson Avenue Civic Center Drive to 18th Street 12 Wilson Avenue 18th Street to 24th Street 13 Hoover Avenue 22nd Street to Mile of Cars Way 14 Hoover Avenue Miles of Cars Way to 30th Street 15 _ Hoover Avenue 30th Street to 33rd Street 16 Roosevelt Avenue Division Street to 4th Street 17 Roosevelt Avenue 4th Street to 8th Street 18 Roosevelt Avenue 8th Street to Plaza Boulevard 19 Roosevelt Avenue Plaza Boulevard to Civic Center Drive 49 of 669 Location Number • Location Name Limits 20 Roosevelt Avenue Civic Center Drive to 16th Street 21 West Avenue 16th Street to 18th Street 22 National City Boulevard Division Street to 4th Street 23 National City Boulevard 4th Street to 8th Street 24 National City Boulevard 8th Street to Plaza Boulevard 25 National City Boulevard Plaza Boulevard to Civic Center Drive 26 National City Boulevard Civic Center Drive to 16th Street 27 National City Boulevard 16th Street to 18th Street 28 National City Boulevard 18th Street to 24th Street 29 National City Boulevard 24th Street to 30th Street 30 National City Boulevard 30th Street to south city limit 31 D Avenue Division Street to 4th Street 32 D Avenue 4th Street to 8th Street 33 D Avenue 8th Street to Plaza Boulevard 34 D Avenue Plaza Boulevard to 16th Street 35 D Avenue 16th Street to 18th Street 36 D Avenue 18th Street to 24th Street 37 D Avenue 24th Street to 26th Street 38 D Avenue 26th Street to 30th Street 39 Highland Avenue North city limit to Division Street 50 of 669 Location Number Location Name Limits 40 Highland Avenue Division Street to 4th Street 41 Highland Avenue 4th Street to 8th Street 42 Highland Avenue 8th Street to Plaza Boulevard 43 Highland Avenue Plaza Boulevard to 16th Street 44 Highland Avenue 16th Street to 18th Street 45 Highland Avenue 18th Street to 24th Street 46 Highland Avenue 24th Street to 30th Street 47 Highland Avenue 30th Street to south city limit__ 48 L Avenue 8th Street to Plaza Boulevard 49 L Avenue 16th Street to 18th Street 50 L Avenue 18th Street to 21st Street 51 !Avenue 21st Street to 24th Street 52 !Avenue 24th Street to 28th Street 53 L Avenue 28th Street to 30th Street 54 Palm Avenue 1-805 to Division Street 55 Palm Avenue Division Street to 4th Street 56 Palm Avenue 4th Street to 8th Street 57 Palm Avenue 8th Street to Plaza Boulevard 58 Palm Avenue Plaza Boulevard to 16th Street 59 Palm Avenue 16th Street to 18th Street 51 of 669 Location Number Location Name Limits 60 Palm Avenue 18th Street to 22nd Street 61 Newell Street 18th Street to Prospect Street 62 Grove Street Prospect Street to Sweetwater Road 63 Euclid Avenue North city limit to Division Street 64 Euclid Avenue Division Street to 4th Street 65 Euclid Avenue 4th Street to 8th Street 66 Euclid Avenue 8th Street to Plaza Boulevard 67 Euclid Avenue Plaza Boulevard to 16th Street 68 Euclid Avenue 16th Street to 18th Street 69 Euclid Avenue 18th Street to 24th Street 70 Euclid Avenue 24th Street to Sweetwater Road 71 Harbison Avenue Division Street to 4th Street 72 Harbison Avenue 4th Street to 8th Street 73 Harbison Avenue 8th Street to Plaza Boulevard 74 Harbison Avenue Plaza Boulevard to 16th Street 75 Plaza Bonita Road Sweetwater Road to Bonita Mesa Road 76 Plaza Bonita Center Way Valley Road to Sweetwater Road 77 Division Street National City Boulevard to D Avenue 78 Division Street D Avenue to Highland Avenue 52 of 669 Location Number Location Name Limits 79 Division Street Highland Avenue to Palm Avenue 80 Division Street Palm Avenue to T Avenue 81 Division Street T Avenue to Euclid Avenue 82 Division Street Euclid Avenue to Harbison Avenue 83 Main Street 1-5 to National City Boulevard 84 4th Street National City Boulevard to D Avenue 85 4th Street D Avenue to Highland Avenue 86 4th Street Highland Avenue to Palm Avenue 87 4th Street Palm Avenue to T Avenue 88 4th Street T Avenue to Euclid Avenue 89 4th Street Euclid Avenue to Clairmont Avenue 90 4th Street Clairmont Avenue to Harbison Avenue 91 8th Street Harbor Drive to 1-5 92 8th Street 1-5 to National City Boulevard 93 8th Street National City Boulevard to D Avenue 94 8th Street D Avenue to Highland Avenue 95 8th Street Highland Avenue to L Avenue 96 8th Street L Avenue to Palm Avenue 97 8th Street Palm Avenue to Euclid Avenue 98 8th Street Euclid Avenue to Harbison Avenue 53 of 669 Location Number Location Name Limits 99 8th Street Harbison Avenue to Plaza Boulevard 1 100 Plaza Boulevard Coolidge Avenue to Hoover Avenue 101 Plaza Boulevard Hoover Avenue to National City Boulevard 102 Plaza Boulevard National City Boulevard to D Avenue 103 Plaza Boulevard D Avenue to Highland Avenue 104 Plaza Boulevard Highland Avenue to Palm Avenue 105 Plaza Boulevard Palm Avenue to 1-805 106 Plaza Boulevard 1-805 to Euclid Avenue 107 Plaza Boulevard Euclid Avenue to Harbison Avenue 108 Plaza Boulevard Harbison Avenue to 8th Street 109 Paradise Valley Road 8th Street to Plaza Entrada 110 Civic Center Drive Harbor Drive to National City Bouievard F 111 16th Street Wilson Avenue to National City Boulevard 112 16th Street National City Boulevard to D Avenue 113 16th Street D Avenue to Highland Avenue 114 16th Street Highland Avenue to L Avenue 115 16th Street L Avenue to Palm Avenue 116 16th Street Palm Avenue to Grove Street 54 of 669 Location Number Location Name Limits 117 16th Street Grove Street to Euclid Avenue 118 16th Street Euclid Avenue to Lanoitan Avenue 119 16th Street Lanoitan Avenue to Harbison Avenue 120 18th Street Wilson Avenue to National City Boulevard 121 18th Street National City Boulevard to D Avenue 122 18th Street D Avenue to Highland Avenue 123 18th Street Highland Avenue to L Avenue 124 18th Street L Avenue to Palm Avenue 125 18th Street Palm Avenue to Newell Street 126 18th Street Newell Street to Euclid Avenue 127 18th Street Euclid Avenue to Granger Avenue 128 18th Street Granger Avenue to Rachael Avenue 129 19th Street Tidelands Avenue to Cieveland Avenue 130 22nd Street Wilson Avenue to National City Boulevard 131 Bay Marina Drive Tidelands Avenue to Marina Way 132 Bay Marina Drive Marina Way to I-5 133 Mile of Cars Way 1-5 to Hoover Avenue 134 Mile of Cars Way Hoover Avenue to National City Boulevard 55 of 669 Location Number Location Name Limits 135 24th Street National City Boulevard to D Avenue 136 24th Street D Avenue to Highland Avenue 137 24th Street Highland Avenue to L Avenue 138 30th Street Hoover Avenue to National City Boulevard 139 30th Street National City Boulevard to D Avenue 140 30th Street D Avenue to Highland Avenue 141 30th Street Highland Avenue to L Avenue 142 30th Street L Avenue to 2nd Avenue 143 Sweetwater Road 2nd Avenue to I- 805/Euclid Avenue 144 Sweetwater Road I-805/Euclid Avenue to Valley Road 145 Sweetwater Road Valley Road to Plaza Bonita Road 146 Sweetwater Road Plaza Bonita Road to Calmoor Street 147 Sweetwater Road Calmoor Street to Plaza Bonita Center Way 148 32nd Street Tidelands Avenue to Marina Way 149 Valley Road Sweetwater Road to Calle Abajo 150 Valley Road Plaza Bonita Center Way to San Miguel Court 56 of 669 RESOLUTION NO. 2016 — RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF NATIONAL CITY AUTHORIZING THE APPROPRIATION OF $75,000 IN THE TRAFFIC MONITORING CIP EXPENDITURE ACCOUNT FROM GENERAL FUND FUND BALANCE TO CONDUCT CITYWIDE ENGINEERING AND TRAFFIC SURVEYS TO ESTABLISH SPEED LIMITS IN ACCORDANCE WITH SECTION 40802(A) OF THE CALIFORNIA VEHICLE CODE WHEREAS, for National City Police Officers to conduct radar speed enforcement, engineering and traffic surveys must be performed every five years in accordance with Section 40802(a) of the California Vehicle Code ("CVC") and Chapter 2B of the California Department of Transportation Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices; and WHEREAS, the last Citywide engineering and traffic surveys for establishing speed limits were conducted and certified by Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc., approximately five years ago, and subsequently amended into Section 11.16.010 "Speed Zones Designated" of the National City Municipal Code by Ordinance of the City Council; and WHEREAS, new surveys must be conducted and certified in order for the City to remain in compliance with CVC 40802(a) and allow for continued radar speed enforcement; and WHEREAS, Kimley-Horn & Associates, Inc., has submitted a proposal to conduct and certify new engineering and traffic surveys to establish speed limits along 150 roadway segments in National City for a not to exceed amount of approximately $75,000; and WHEREAS, an appropriation of $75,000 in the Traffic Monitoring CIP expenditure account from General Fund fund balance is necessary to conduct Citywide Engineering and Traffic Surveys to establish speed limits in accordance with Section 40802(a) of the California Vehicle Code. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of National City hereby authorizes the appropriation of $75,000 in the Traffic Monitoring CIP expenditure account from the General Fund fund balance to conduct Citywide Engineering and Traffic surveys to establish speed limits in accordance with Section 40802(a) of the California Vehicle Code. PASSED and ADOPTED this 18'h day of October, 2016. Ron Morrison, Mayor ATTEST: APPROVED AS TO FORM: Michael R. Dalla, City Clerk George H. Eiser, III Interim City Attorney 57 of 669 CC/CDC-HA Agenda 10/18/2016 — Page 58 The following page(s) contain the backup material for Agenda Item: Resolution of the City Council of the City of National City authorizing the installation of a blue curb handicap parking space with sign in front of the residence at 24 E. Division Street (TSC No. 2016-08). (Engineering/Public Works) 58 of 669 CITY OF NATIONAL CITY, CALIFORNIA COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT MEETING DATE: October 18, 2016 AGENDA ITEM NO. ITEM TITLE: Resolution of the City Council of the City of National City authorizing the installation of a blue curb handicap parking space with sign in front of the residence at 24 E. Division Street (TSC No. 2016-08). PREPARED BY Stephen Manganiello PRONE: 619-336-4382 EXPLANATION: See attached. FINANCIAL STATEMENT: ACCOUNT NO. NIA ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW: N/A ORDINANCE: INTRODUCTION: DEPARTMENT: Engineering/Public Works APPROVED BY: FINAL ADOPTION: APPROVED: APPROVED: Finance MIS STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Adopt the Resolution authorizing the installation of a blue curb handicap parking space with sign in front of the residence at 24 E. Division Street. BOARD / COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION: At their meeting on September 14, 2016, the Traffic Safety Committee unanimously approved the staff recommendation to install a blue curb handicap parking space with sign in front of the residence at 24 E. Division Street. ,311111 ATTACHMENTS: 1. Explanation w! Location Map 2. Staff Report to the Traffic Safety Committee on September 14, 2016 (TSC No. 2016-08) 3. Resolution b& or bb 3 EXPLANATION Mrs. Bella Wilkinson, resident of 24 E. Division Street, has requested a blue curb handicap parking space in front of her house. The resident possesses a valid disabled person's placard from the California Department of Motor Vehicles. Staff visited the site and verified that the residence does not have a driveway or garage. The curb length in front of the residential lot is approximately 90 feet. Currently, there are no on -street blue curb handicap parking spaces in the vicinity. The City Council has a policy, which is used to evaluate requests for handicap parking spaces. The City Council Policy requirements for "Special Hardship" cases are as follows: 1. Applicant (or guardian) must be in possession of valid license plates or placard for "disabled persons" or "disabled veterans". This condition is met. 2 The proposed disabled parking space must be in front (or side if on a corner lot) of the applicant's (or guardian's) place of residence. This condition is met. 3. The residence must not have useable off-street parking available or an off-street space available that may be converted into disabled parking. This condition is met. On September 14, 2016, the Traffic Safety Committee unanimously approved the staff recommendation to install a blue curb handicap parking space with sign in front of the residence at 24 E. Division Street, The applicant was unable to attend the Traffic Safety Committee Meeting. Staff did however, inform the resident that if approved, handicap parking spaces do not constitute "personal reserved parking" and that any person with valid "disabled persons" license plates or placards may park in handicap spaces. If approved by City Council, all work will be performed by City Public Works. 60 of 669 Location Map with Recommended Enhancements jTSC Item #2016-08) 24 E. Division St. Proposed Blue Curb Handicap PJtig R99 (AA) 61 of 669 ITEM TITLE: 3 NATIONAL CITY TRAFFIC SAFETY COMMITTEE AGENDA REPORT FOR SEPTEMBER 14, 2016 ITEM NO. 2016-08 REQUEST FOR INSTALLATION OF A BLUE CURB HANDICAP PARKING SPACE WITH SIGNAGE AT 24 E. DIVISION STREET (BY B. WILKINSON) PREPARED BY: Stephen Manganiello, Director of Public Works / City Engineer Engineering & Public Works Department DISCUSSION: Mrs. Bella Wilkinson, resident of 24 E. Division Street, has requested a blue curb handicap parking space in front of her house. The resident possesses a valid disabled person's placard from the California Department of Motor Vehicles. Staff visited the site and verified that the aforementioned residence does not have an accessible driveway or garage to accommodate a vehicle. The curb length in front of the residential lot is approximately 90.5 feet. Currently, there are no public blue curb handicap parking spaces provided in the vicinity. The City Council has adopted a policy, which is used to evaluate requests for handicap parking spaces. The City Council Policy requirements for "Special Hardship" cases are as follows: 1. Applicant (or guardian) must be in possession of valid license plates or placard for "disabled persons" or "disabled veterans". This condition is met. 2. The proposed disabled parking space must be in front (or side if en a corner lot) of the applicant's (or guardian's) place of residence. This condition is met. 3. The residence must not have useable off-street parking available or an off-street space available that may be converted into disabled parking. This condition is met. It shall be noted that handicap parking spaces do not constitute "personal reserved parking" and that any person with valid "'disabled persons" license plates or placards may park in handicap spaces. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Since all three conditions of the City Council's Disabled Persons Parking Policy are met for this "Special Hardship" case, staff recommends installation of a blue curb handicap parking space with signage in front of the residence at 24 E. Division Street. EXHIBITS: 62 of 669 1. Correspondence 2. Location Map 3. Photos 4. Disabled Persons Parking Policy 2016-0B 63 of 669 g cS m cn REQUEST FOR BLUE CURB DISABLED PERSONS PARKING SAVE NAME OF DISABLED PERSON: 41e&. 01 01(1115©rn NAME OF REPRESENTATIVE FOR DISABLED PERSON (if afferent from above): tw, L ft ADDRESS: I ti z vi ". Gl;+f On a/ c l i- q! q o EMAIL: PHONE NUM$E t: Please answer the following questions, which will assist Engineering staff, the Traffic Safety Committee, and your ESty Council In determining if you are qualified to have a blue curb disabled persons parking space placed in front of your residence. Please be informed that all blue curb parking spaces are considered public paring. Therefore, any registered vehicle in possession of a disabled persons placard or license plate Is legally allowed to park In the blue curb space for up to 72 continuous hours. 1) Do you possess a valid disabled person's placard issued by the California Department Motor Vehicles (DMV)? YES ElNO If YES, please include a copy of the placard, which contains your name, address, placard number, and expiration date. 2) Does your residence have a garage? AYES If YES, is the gage large enough to parka vehide yjv NO (minimum of 20' x t2'j 3) Does your residence have a driveway? DESgiNO RYES, a) Is the driveway large enough to park a vehicle? DYES ScifiD (minimum of 20' x in b) Isthe driveway level? DYES 4NO 0Is the driveway sloped/inclined? OYES a 4) Please write any Iditicxral comments here (opiconal, p Liedot6L T-11,aid tar t t c I7 d- tic 0-646��Gn -c- �4 64 of 669 WHEN YOUR PLACARD IS PROPERLY *DISABLED PERSON PARKING SPA PAYING *GREEN ZONES W'THOUT PREFERENTIAL PARKING I.RIVIL YOU MAY NOT PARK IN/OW: *SPACES MARKED BY CROgSHATC' revurmoNroFtronstecur A Pubftc Service Agency ***CUSTOMER RECEIPT COPY*** *** D I S AB L E D PLACARD NUMBER:" J WILKINSON BELL 24 DIVISION ST NATIONAL CITY CA 91950 CO: 37 EXPIRES: 06/30/2017 PERSON PLAC ARD *** PIC: 1 TV: 91 DATE ISSUED: 11/02/15 MO/YR: WY DT FiS RECVD: 11/02/15 CASH CHCK CRDT NONE E10. 613 18 0000000 0014 CS E10 110215 N1 DEPARTMENT OF MOTOR VEHICLES PLACARD IDWTIFICATION CARD THIS IDENTIFICATION CARD OR FACSIMILE COPY IS TO BE: CARRIED BY THE PLACARD 0 j ' - ' a-:.: IT TO ANY. PEACE OFFICER UPON DEMAND. IDIATELY NOTIFY DMV FR `� "` :''{Y =: L OF ANY CHANGE OF ADDRESS . WHEN PARTING, HANG THEPLACARD VIEW MIf.ROR . REMOVE I_'�' WHEN DRI ING . A Public Ser►nceAgency . - PLA • - a # : 11 PLACARD HOLDER: WILKINSON BELT,A EXPIRES: 06/30/2017•. 24 DIVISION ST DOB: 4 * - ISSUEDt 11/02/15 TYPE: Ni NATIONAL CITY CA 91950 PURCHASE OF FUEL (BUSNESS & PROFESSIONS CODE 13660): STATE LAW REQUIRES SERVICE STATIONS TO REFUEL ADISABLED PERSON' S VEHICLE AT SELF-SERVICE RATES4 EXCEPT SELF-...-'+ CE FACILITIES WITH ONLY ONE CASHIER. MAY P IRK iiv % o : STRE,' -METERED ZONES WITHOUT LETS *STREET WHERE SIDENTS AND MERCHANTS. *WHITE OR YELLOW ZONES LED PERSON PARTING SPACES. IT IS CONSIDERED MISUSE: *TO - UNLESS THE DISABLED OWNER IS BEING TRANSPORTED *TO DISPLA. . `WSICH HAS BEMCANCELLED OR REVOKED *TO LOAN YOUR - PLACARD TO �,� 1TCLUDING FAMILY KE BERS - MISUSE IS A MISD ANOR (SECTION 4461VC) AND CANRE,SULT IN CANCELLATION OR REVOCATION OF THE PLACARD, -LOSS OF PARKING PRIVT „S, AND/OR FINES. r.. 65 of 669 ROVrM MFRROR BEFORE ORIVII*5 VEH/CLE CALIFORNIA --WARN:1 NIG: r -110S, 4'4 pArtgl g E,T rbcad 11r1 MAXimum 'tarry of 1.4,21:10..r 1,711.)Fit;o1A:".ir FIN711_ (Ski.5-Tnt-ssZPr Codr 134.15Co1 ilref 41131 -ELI:5-2..2,4E Gi 66 of 669 Location Map with Recommended Enhancements (TSC Item #2016-O 1 E. 9 5t STREET 24 E. 1}Ivlslan Si. DIVISION STREET Proposed Blue Curk Handicap Parkins R9$ (CA) 67 of 669 24 E. DIVISION STREET PROPOSED LOCATION Location of Proposed Blue Curb and Signage at 24 E. Division Street (looking South) Location of Proposed Blue Curb and Signage at 24 E. Division Street (looking South-West) 68 of 669 DISABLED PERSONS PARKING POLICY The purpose of a- disabled persons parking zone is to provide designated parking spaces at major points of assembly for the exclusive use of physically disabled persons whose vehicle displays a distinguishing license plate as authorized by the California Department of Motor Vehicles. The City Council may upon recommendation of the City Engineer, designate specially marked and posted on -street parking spaces for disabled persons pursuant to California Vehicle Code 21101, et seq. at the following facilities: 1. Government buildings serving the public such as administration buildings, public employment offices, public libraries, police stations, etc. 2. Hospitals and convalescent homes with more than 75-bed capacity. 3. Medical facilities and doctors' offices staffed by a maximum of five practitioners. Zones shall be located to serve a maximum number of facilities on one block. 4. Community service facilities such as senior citizens service centers, etc. 5. Accredited vocational training and educational facilities where no off- street parking is provided for disabled persons. 6. Employment offices for major enterprises employing more. than 200 persons. 7. Public recreational facilities including municipal swimming pools, recreation halls, museums, etc. S. Public theaters, auditoriums, meeting halls, arenas, stadiums with more than 300 seating capacity. 9. Other places of assembly such as schools and churches. 10. Commercial and/or office building(s) with an aggregate of more than 50,000 square feet of usable floor space. Zone shA it be located to serve a maximum number of facilities on one bloc. 11. Hotels catering to daily guests, maintaining a ground floor lobby and a switchboard that is operated 24 hours per day. 69 of 669 12. A hotel or apartment house catering to weekly or monthly guests and containing more than 30 separate living units. In addition, disabled persons parking spaces may be provided within all publicly owned, leased or controlled off-street parking facilities as specified in the General Requirements. General Requirements Each disabled persons parking space shall be indicated by blue paint and a sign (white on blue) showing the international symbol of accessibility (a profile view of a wheelchair with occupant). Where installed under the above criteria the total number of disabled persons curb parking spaces will be limited to 3% of the total number of on -street parking spaces available in the area and shall be distributed uniformly within the area. Disabled persons parking will not be installed at locations with a full-time parking prohibition. When a disabled persons parking zone is installed where a part-time parking prohibition is in effect, the disabled persons parking zone will have the same time restrictions as the part-time parking prohibition. The cost of installing disabled persons parking will be assumed by the City on public streets and public off-street parking facilities. In establishing on -street parking facilities for the disabled there shall be a reasonable determination made that the need is of an on -going nature. The intent is to prevent the proliferation of special parking stalls that may be installed for a short-term purpose but later are seldom used. Unjustified installation of such parking stalls unnecessarily increases the City's maintenance and operations costs, reduce available on - street parking for the general public, and detract from the overall effectiveness of the disabled persons parking program. Special Hardship Cases It is not the intention of the City to provide personal reserved parking on the public right jof-way, especially in residential areas. However, exceptions may be made, in special hardship cases, provided all of the following conditions exists: (1) Applicant Or guardian) must be in possession of valid license plates for "disabled persons" or "disabled veterans." (2) The proposed disabled parking space must be in front of the applicant's (or guardian's) place of residence. 70 of 669 (3) Subject residence must not have useable off-street parking available or off-street space available that may be converted into disabled parking. NOTE:It must be emphasized that such parking spaces do not constitute "personal reserved parking" and that any person with valid "disabled persons" license plates may park in the above stalls. 7ha:p 71 of 669 RESOLUTION NO. 2016 — RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF NATIONAL CITY AUTHORIZING THE INSTALLATION OF A BLUE CURB HANDICAP PARKING SPACE WITH SIGN IN FRONT OF THE RESIDENCE AT 24 EAST DIVISION STREET WHEREAS, the resident of 24 East Division Street, possesses a valid Disabled Person Placard from the State of California Department of Motor Vehicles and has requested a blue curb handicap parking space in front of her house; and WHEREAS, after conducting an inspection and review, staff determined that all conditions have been met for the property to qualify for a blue curb handicap parking space; and WHEREAS, on September 14, 2016, the Traffic Safety Committee unanimously approved the staff recommendation to install a blue curb handicap parking space with sign in front of the residence at 24 East Division Street. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of National City hereby authorizes the City Engineer to approve the installation of a blue curb handicap parking space with signage in front of the residence at 24 East Division Street. PASSED and ADOPTED this 18th day of October, 2016. ATTEST: Michael R. Dalla, City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: George H. Eiser, III Interim City Attorney Ron Morrison, Mayor 72 of 669 CC/CDC-HA Agenda 10/18/2016 — Page 73 The following page(s) contain the backup material for Agenda Item: Resolution of the City Council of the City of National City authorizing the installation of a blue curb handicap parking space with sign in front of the residence at 108 E. 5th Street (TSC No. 2016-09). (Engineering/Public Works) 73 of 669 CITY OF NATIONAL CITY, CALIFORNIA COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT MEETING DATE October 18, 2016 AGENDA ITEM NO. ITEM TITLE: Resolution of the City Council of the City of National City authorizing the installation of a blue curb handicap parking space with sign in front of the residence at 108 E. 5th Street (TSC No. 2016-09). PREPARED BY: Stephen Manganiello PHONE: 619-336-4382 EXPLANATION: See attached. DEPARTMENT: Engineering/Public Works APPROVED BY: FINANCIAL STATEMENT: APPROVED: ACCOUNT NO. APPROVED: NIA ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW: NIA ORDINANCE: INTRODUCTION: FINAL ADOPTION: Finance MIS STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Adopt the Resolution authorizing the installation of a blue curb handicap parking space with sign in front of the residence at 108 E. 5ht Street. BOARD 1 COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION: At their meeting on September 14, 2016, the Traffic Safety Committee unanimously approved the staff recommendation to install a blue curb handicap parking space with sign in front of the residence at 108 E. 5th Street. ATTACHMENTS: 1. Explanation +mil Location Map 2. Staff Report to the Traffic Safety Committee on September 14, 2016 (TSC No. 2016-09) 3. Resolution 74 of 669 EXPLANATION Mrs. Nancy Toba-Laba, resident of 108 E. 5th Street, has requested a blue curb handicap parking space in front of her home due to physical limitations. The resident has stated that it is difficult to park on her street because there are several businesses close to her house. Mrs. Toba-Laba possesses a valid Disabled Person Placard from the State of California Department of Motor Vehicles. Staff visited the site and verified that the residence does not have a driveway or garage, The curb length in front of the residential lot is approximately 50 feet. Currently, there is one on -street blue curb handicap parking space located one block to the south in front of the residence at 917 E. 6th Street. The City Council has a policy, which is used to evaluate requests for handicap parking spaces. The City Council Policy requirements for "Special Hardship" cases are as follows: 1. Applicant (or guardian) must be in possession of valid license plates or placard for "disabled persons" or "disabled veterans". This condition is met. 2. The proposed disabled parking space must be in front (or side if on a corner lot) of the applicant's (or guardian's) place of residence. This condition is met. 3. The residence must not have useable off-street parking available or an off-street space available that may be converted into disabled parking. This condition is met. On September 14, 2016, the Traffic Safety Committee unanimously approved the staff recommendation to install a blue curb handicap parking space with sign in frnnt of the residence at 108 E. 5th Street. Staff informed the resident that if approved, handicap parking spaces do not constitute "personal reserved parking" and that any person with valid "disabled persons" license plates or placards may park in handicap spaces. If approved by City Council, all work will be performed by City Public Works. 75 of 669 Location Map with Recommended Enhancements (TSC item: 2016-09) 1O E. fith Stre.2t Proposed Slue Curb Disabled Parking CLA. PARKING ONLY %Sit -A Existing Blue Curb Disabled Parking at 917 etStreet 76 of 669 4 NATIONAL CITY TRAFFIC SAFETY COMMITTEE AGENDA REPORT FOR SEPTEMBER 14, 2016 ITEM NO. 2016-09 ITEM TITLE: REQUEST FOR INSTALLATION OF A BLUE CURB HANDICAP PARKING SPACE WITH SIGNAGE IN FRONT OF THE RESIDENCE AT 108 E. 5th STREET (BY N. TOBA-LABA) PREPARED BY: Stephen Manganiello, Director of Public Works 1 City Engineer Engineering & Public Works Department DISCUSSION: Mrs. Nancy Toba-Laba, resident of 108 E. 51h Street, has requested a blue curb handicap parking space in front of her home due to physical limitations. The resident has stated that it is difficult to park on her street because there are several businesses close to her house. Mrs. Toba-Laba possesses a valid Disabled Person Placard from the State of California Department of Motor Vehicles. Staff visited the site and observed that Mrs. Toba-Laba does not have an accessible driveway or garage. The length of curb between the beginning of curb (B.O.C.) of the southwest at E. 5th Street and Lantana Dr. and the end of curb (E.O.C.) radius of the southeast corner/pedestrian ramp at E. 5th Street and B Ave is approximately 460 feet of unrestricted parking. Currently, there are no public blue curb handicap parking spaces provided in the vicinity. The City Council has adopted a policy, which is used to evaivate requests for handicap parking spaces. The City Council Policy requirements for "Special Hardship" cases are as follows: ^:. Applicant (or guardian) must be in possession of valid license plates for "disabled persons" or "disabled veterans", This condition is met. 2. The proposed disabled parking space must be in front of the applicant's (or guardian's) place of residence. This condition is met. 3. The residence must not have useable off-street parking available or an off-street space available that maybe converted into disabled parking. This condition is met. It shall be noted that handicap parking spaces do not constitute "personal reserved parking" and that any person with valid "disabled persons" license plates may park in handicap spaces. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: 77 of 669 Since all three conditions of the City Council's Disabled Persons Parking Policy are met for this "'Special Hardship" case, staff recommends installation of a blue curb handicap parking space with signage in front of the residence at 108 E. 5th Street. EXHIBITS: 1. Correspondence 2. Location Map 3. Photos 4. Disabled Persons Parking Policy 2018-09 78 of 669 REQUEST FOR BLUE CURB DISABLED PERSONS PARKING SPACE NAME OF DISABLED PERSON: uri—r— Lobl NAME OF REPRESENTATIVE FOR DISABLED PERSON (If different from above): ADDRESS: S EMAIL: PHONE NUMBER: _ Please answer the following questions, which will assist Engineering staff, the Traffic Safety Committee, and your City Council in determining if you are qualified to have a blue curb disabled persons parking space placed in front of your residence. Please be informed that all blue curb parldng spaces are considered public parking. Therefore, any registered vehicle in possession of a disabled persons placard or license plate Is legally allowed to park In the blue curb space for up to 72 continuous hours. 1) Do you possess a valid disabled person's placard issued by the California Department of Motor Vehicles (DMV)? OYES NO If YES, please Include a copy of the placard, which contains your name, address, placard number, and expiration date. 2) Does your residence have a garage? TIMES ONO If YES, Is the garage large enough to park a vehicle OYES ENO (rnlnimum of W x 121 Does your residence have a driveway? DYES ENO if YES, a) is the driveway large enough to park a vehicle? ®YES EiNO (minimum of2D'x12') b) Is the driveway level? EYES ONO c) Is the driveway sloped/inclined? FIVES ENO 4) Please write any additional comments here (optional). 79 of 669 August 03, 2016 Nancy Toba-Laba 108 E 5th St National City, CA 91950 Dear Sirs Department of parking permits in National City allows me to greet you cordially. My name is NancyToba-Baba and in May of 2016 i brought all my documents to apply for a handicapped parking in front of my home at 108 E 5th St National City, CA 91950. The reason why I ask this permission Is because in this street every day is more difficult to park for different reasons, either because of lack of education some people occupy more than one space, people painted red ditch near driveway to avoid others parked out front. Also the location of a new gym that opened very close to 5th and businesses repair and sale of vehicles, without forgetting that the 365 days of the year are parked trailers for equipment in this street and never has any inspector municipality to inspect all these irregularities. I live 17 years in this direction and 1 cannot park any day. I ask you with all my heart to help me with this request because my— jand this would help make my life a little less frustrate. Beforehand thank you very much Sincerely Nancy Toba-Laba A ''DE 9I:V 9 r T:3Ticd 13 80 of 669 ***CUSTOMER RECEIPT COPY*** EXPIRES: 06/30/2017 ***DISABLED PERSON PLACARD*** PLACARD NUMBER: PIC: 1 TV: 92 TOBALABA NANCY 108 E 5TH ST NATIONAL CITY CA 91950 CO: 37 DATE ISSUED: MO/YR: DT FEES RECVD: .•- • . „ DUE - CASH CHCK CRDT • ..- ' - • • • • • • • - 03/23/15 WP 03/23/15 NONE KOO 613 07 0000000 0008 CS KOO 032315 Ni DEPARTMENT OF MOTOR VEHICLES PLACARD IDENTIFICATION CARD THIS_IDENTIFICATION CARD OR FACSIMII4 COPY IS TO BE CARRIED BY,THE PLACARD OWNER,..z\-p:R.ESW IT TO ANY PEACE OFFICER UPON DEMAND. IMMEDIATELY NOTIFY DMV BY*00W-Jag-MAIL or ANY CHANGE OF ADDRESS. WHEN PARK_LN-G, HANG THE vial:CARD FROWTW'REMR VIEW MIRROR° REMOVE IT WHEN DRIVING_ PLACARD#: EXPIRES: DOB: ISSUED TYPE: 11111 16/31Lanii 03/23/15 NI PLACARD HOLDER: TOBALABA NANCY 108 E 5TH Sr NATIONAL CITY CA 91950 PURCHASE OF FUEL (BUSINESS & PROFESSIONS CODE 136601: STATE LAW REQUIRES SERVICE STATIONS TO REFUEL A DISABLED PERnON'S VEHICLE AT SELF-SERVICE RATES, EXCEPT sEL7,,,-.,PgRvipg FACILITIES WITH ONLY ONE CASHIER. WHEN YOUR PLACARD IS PROPERLYADISPiiiED;)*MAY PARK IN/ON: *DISABLED PERSON PARKING SP? (BLUE -ZONES). -*STREET METERED ZONES WITHOUT PAYING *GREEN ZONES WITHOUTAtSTRICTIONS,t0:.TIIME LIMITS *STREET WHERE PREFERENTIAL PARKING PRIVILEGESARE:.OPF.EN-_TO.:RESIDENTS AND MERCHANTS. YOU MAY NOT PARK IN/ON: *RED:ZONES *'.11:040t14'ZONES *WHITE OR -YELLOW ZONES *SPACES MARKED BY CROSSHATCH IEIVES'111iT:,.05--1:0.FiBLED PERSON PARKING SPACES. IT IS CONSIDERED MISUSE: *TO DIS145.kinA:;PillicARD UNLESS THE DISABLED OWNER IS BEING TRANSPORTED *TO DISPIAt.:A-RIAC-ARD WHICH HAS BEEN CANCELLED OR REVOKED *TO LOAN YOUR PLACARD TO AirDITE, INCLUDING FAMILY MEMBERS. MISUSE IS A MISDEMEANOR (SECTION 4461VC) AND CAN RESULT IN CANCELLATION OR REVOCATION OF THE PLACARD.. LOSS 9"4 PRIVILEGES. AND/OR FINES. 81 of 669 RINOVE. FROM MVRRC.111 BEFORE ORNING VENCLE CALIFORNIA 'WARNING Oloqai Loal. of ,lflkokiii•Ant p;tai*itin p1=-Ard cc.-.ufti !pull in, ri q,11 of S4,100," L.F:Cj,40. .0; EL fl F c _ ,V,1" , , I • Apt,kL 82 of 669 Location Map with Recommended Enhancements (TSC item: 2016-09) _--�lir - •t .. w j r E. 6th STREET _ y_s Calk -LAW" 4.1 is 108 E. S". Street E. 5th STREET d� RCA Proposed flue Curb Disabled Parking PARKING GNU Pit (CA) Existing Slue Curb Disabled Parking at 917 E. 61h Street • 0 83 of 669 Location of Proposed Blue Curb and Slgnage at 108 E. 5th Street (looking South -East) PROPDSED LOCATION Location of Proposed Blue Curb and Signage at 108 E. 5t Street (looking South) 84 of 669 DISABLED PERSONS PARKING POLICY The purpose of a disabled persons parking zone is to provide designated parking spaces at major points of assembly for the exclusive use of physically disabled persons whose vehicle displays a distinguishing license plate as authorized by the California Department of Motor Vehicles. The City Council may upon recommendation of the City Engineer, designate specially marked and posted on -street parking spaces for disabled persons pursuant to California Vehicle Code 21101, et seq. at the following facilities: 1. Government buildings serving the public such as administration buildings, public employment offices, public libraries, police stations, etc. 2. Hospitals and convalescent homes with more than 75-bed capacity. 3. Medical facilities and doctors' offices staffed by a maximum of five practitioners. Zones shall be located to serve a maximum number of facilities on one block. 4. Community service facilities such as senior citizens service centers, etc. 5. Accredited vocational training and educational facilities where no off- street parking is provided for disabled persons. 6. Employment offices for major enterprises employing more. than 200 persons. 7. Public recreational facilities including municipal swimming pools, recreation halls, museums, etc. 8. Public theaters, auditoriums, meeting halls, arenas, stadiums with more than 300 seating capacity. 9. Other places of assembly such as schools and churches. 10. Commercial and/or office building(s) with an aggregate of more than 50,000 square feet of usable floor space. Zone shall be located to serve a maximum number of facilities on one block. 11. Hotels catering to daily guests, maintaining a ground floor lobby and a switchboard that is operated 24 hours per day. 85 of 669 12. A hotel or apartment house catering to weekly or monthly guests and containing more than 30 separate living units. In addition, disabled persons parking spaces may be provided within all publicly owned, leased or controlled off-street parking facilities as specified in the General Requirements. General Requirements Each disabled persons parking space shall be indicated by blue paint and a sign (white on blue) showing the international symbol of accessibility (a profile view of a wheelchair with occupant). Where installed under the above criteria the total number of disabled persons curb parking spaces will be limited to 3% of the total number of on -street parking spaces available in the area and shall be distributed uniformly within the area. Disabled persons parking will not be installed at locations with a full-time parking prohibition.- When a disabled persons parking zone is installed where a part-time parking prohibition is in effect, the disabled persons parking zone will have the same time restrictions as the part-time parking prohibition. The cost of installing disabled persons parking will be assumed by the City on public streets and public off-street parking facilities. In establishing on -street parking facilities for the disabled there shall be a reasonable determination made that the need is of an on -going nature. The intent is to prevent the proliferation of special parking stalls that may be installed for a short-term purpose but later are seldom used. Unjustified installation of such. parking stalls unnecessarily increases the City's maintenance and operations costs, reduce available on - street parking for the general public, and detract from the overall effectiveness of the disabled persons parking program. Special IIardshirt Cases It is not the intention of the City to provide personal reserved parking on the public right-jof-way, especially in residential areas. However, exceptions may be made, in special hardship cases, provided all of the following conditions exists: (1) Applicant (or guardian) must be in possession of valid license plates for "disabled persons" or "disabled veterans." (2) The proposed disabled parking space must be in front of the applicant's (or guardian's) place of residence. 86 of 669 (3) Subject residence must not have useable off-street parking available or off-street space available that may be converted into disabled parking. NOTE:It must be emphasized that such parking spaces do not constitute "personal reserved parking" and that any person with valid "disabled persons" license plates may park in the above stalls. Jha: p 87 of 669 RESOLUTION NO. 2016 — RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF NATIONAL CITY AUTHORIZING THE INSTALLATION OF A BLUE CURB HANDICAP PARKING SPACE WITH SIGN IN FRONT OF THE RESIDENCE AT 108 EAST 5TH STREET WHEREAS, the resident of 108 East 5th Street, possesses a valid Disabled Person Placard from the State of California Department of Motor Vehicles and has requested a blue curb handicap parking space in front of her house; and WHEREAS, after conducting an inspection and review, staff determined that all conditions have been met for the property to qualify for a blue curb handicap parking space; and WHEREAS, on September 14, 2016, the Traffic Safety Committee unanimously approved the staff recommendation to install a blue curb handicap parking space with sign in front of the residence at 108 East 5th Street. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of National City hereby authorizes the City Engineer to approve the installation of a blue curb handicap parking space with signage in front of the residence at 108 East 5th Street. PASSED and ADOPTED this 18' day of October, 2016. ATTEST: Michael R. Dalla, City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: George H. Eiser, III Interim City Attorney Ron Morrison, Mayor 88 of 669 CC/CDC-HA Agenda 10/18/2016 — Page 89 The following page(s) contain the backup material for Agenda Item: Investment transactions for the month ended August 31, 2016. (Finance) 89 of 669 CITY OF NATIONAL CITY, CALIFORNIA COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT MEETING DATE: October 18, 2016 AGENDA ITEM NO. ITEM TITLE: Investment transactions for the month ended August 31, 2016. PREPARED BY: Ronald Gutlay DEPARTMENT: Finance PHONE: 619-336-4346 APPROVED BY: '14 :• EXPLANATION: In accordance with California Government Code Section 53646 and City of National City's investment policy section XIIA, a monthly report shall be submitted to the legislative body accounting for transactions made during the reporting period. The attached listing reflects investment transactions of the City of National City's investment portfolio for the month ending August 31, 2016. FINANCIAL STATEMENT: ACCOUNT NO. NA APPROVED: r niance APPROVED: ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW: This is not a project and, therefore, not subject to environmental review. ORDINANCE: INTRODUCTION: FINAL ADOPTION: MIS STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Accept and file the Investment Transaction Ledger for the month ended August 31, 2016. BOARD t COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION: NA ATTACHMENTS: Investment Transaction Ledger 90 of 669 City of National City Consolidated Account #10218 Transaction Ledger 7/31/16 Thru 8/31/16 Transaction Type Settlement Date CUSIP Quantity Security Description Acq/Disp Price Yield Amount Interest Pur/Sold Total Amount Gain/Loss ACQUISITIONS Purchase Purchase Purchase Purchase Purchase Purchase Purchase Purchase CO 0 rn 0) hase hase Purchase Purchase Short Sale Short Sale 08/01/2016 60934N807 08/02/2016 60934N807 08/02/2016 912828S43 08/08/2016 60934N807 08/25/2016 3137EADR7 08/25/2016 60934N807 08/25/2016 60934N807 08/28/2016 60934N807 08/31/2016 3130A8PK3 08/31/2016 60934N807 08/31/2016 60934N807 08/31/2016 912828L32 Subtotal 08/25/2016 60934N807 08/31/2016 60934N807 Subtotal 2,812.50 0.31 435,000.00 US Treasury Note 0.75% Due 7/15/2019 2,581.25 455,000.00 575,000.00 5,750.00 2,384.38 455,000.00 FHLB Note 0.625% Due 8/7/2018 570,000.00 2,850.00 240,000.00 2,746,378.44 Federated Prime Value Oblig Govt Oblig Fund Inst. Federated Prime Value Oblig Govt Oblig Fund Inst. Federated Prime Value Oblig Govt Oblig Fund Inst. FHLMC Note 1.375% Due 5/1/2020 Federated Prime Value Fund Inst. Federated Prime Value Fund Inst. Federated Prime Value Fund Inst. Federated Prime Value Fund Inst. Federated Prime Value Fund Inst. US Treasury Note 1.375% Due 8/31/2020 Oblig Govt Oblig Oblig Govt Oblig Oblig Govt Oblig Oblig Govt Oblig Oblig Govt Oblig -462,313.74 Federated Prime Value Oblig Govt Oblig Fund Inst. -695,349.43 Federated Prime Value Oblig Govt Oblig Fund Inst. -1,157,663.17 1.000 0.01 % 2,812.50 0.00 2,812.50 0.00 1.000 0.01 % 0.31 0.00 0.31 0.00 99.950 0.77 % 434,780.56 159.58 434,940.14 0.00 1.000 0.01 % 2,581.25 0.00 2,581.25 0.00 101.172 1.05 % 460,332.60 1,981.14 462,313.74 0.00 1.000 0.01 % 575,000.00 0.00 575,000.00 0.00 1.000 0.01 % 5,750.00 0.00 5,750.00 0.00 1.000 0.01 % 2,384.38 0.00 2,384.38 0.00 99.491 0.89 % 452,684.05 189.58 452,873.63 0.00 1.000 0.01 % 570,000.00 0.00 570,000.00 0.00 1.000 0.01 % 2,850.00 0.00 2,850.00 0.00 101.032 1.11 % 242,475.80 0.00 242,475.80 0.00 2,751,651.45 2,330.30 2,753,981.75 0.00 1.000 -462,313.74 0.00-462,313.74 0.00 1.000 -695,349.43 0.00-695,349.43 0.00 -1,157,663.17 0.00-1,157,663.17 0.00 TOTAL ACQUISITIONS 1,588,715.27 1,593,988.28 2,330.30 1,596,318.58 0.00 DISPOSITIONS Closing Purchase 08/25/2016 60934N807 -462,313.74 Federated Prime Value Oblig Govt Oblig Fund Inst. 1.000 -462,313.74 0.00 -462,313.74 0.00 Chandler Asset Management - CONFIDENTIAL Page 6 Execution Time: 9/2/2016 12:18:29 AM City of National City Consolidated Account #10218 Transaction Ledger 7/31/16 Thru 8/31/16 Transaction Settlement Acq/Disp Type Date CUSIP a uanti ': curity Descriptio: _ `:rice Yield DISPOSITIONS Closing Purchase 08/31/2016 60934N807 Subtotal -1,157,663.17 Sale 08/02/2016 60934N807 Sale 08/25/2016 60934N807 Sale 08/31/2016 60934N807 Subtotal 1,592,603.31 Maturity 08/25/2016 3137EACW7 Maturity 08/31/2016 912828RF9 -695,349.43 Federated Prime Value Oblig Govt Oblig Fund Inst. 434,940.14 Federated Prime Value Oblig Govt Oblig Fund Inst. 462,313.74 Federated Prime Value Oblig Govt Oblig Fund Inst. 695,349.43 Federated Prime Value Oblig Govt Oblig Fund Inst. 575,000.00 FHLMC Note 2% Due 8/25/2016 570,000.00 US Treasury Note Subtotal 1,145,000.00 rn rn co AL DISPOSITIONS 1,579,940.14 1% Due 8/31/2016 1.000 -695,349.43 0.00-695,349.43 0.00 -1,157,663.17 0.00-1,157,663.17 0.00 1.000 0.01 % 434,940.14 0.00 434,940.14 0.00 1.000 0.01 % 462,313.74 0.00 462,313.74 0.00 1.000 0.01 % 695,349.43 0.00 695,349.43 0.00 1,592,603.31 0.00 1,592,603.31 0.00 100.000 575,000.00 0.00 575,000.00 -29,762.00 100.000 570,000.00 0.00 570,000.00 -11,357.38 1,145,000.00 0.00 1,145,000.00 -41,119.38 1,579,940.14 0.00 1,579,940.14 -41,119.38 OTHER TRANSACTIONS Interest 08/01/2016 3137EADK2 Interest 08/08/2016 3135G0TG8 Interest 08/25/2016 3137EACW7 Interest 08/28/2016 3135G0MZ3 Interest 08/31/2016 912828RF9 Subtotal 450,000.00 FHLMC Note 1.25% Due 8/1/2019 590,000.00 FNMA Note 0.875% Due 2/8/2018 575,000.00 FHLMC Note 2% Due 8/25/2016 545,000.00 FNMA Note 0.875% Due 8/28/2017 570,000.00 US Treasury Note 1% Due 8/31/2016 2,730,000.00 0.000 2,812.50 0.000 2,581.25 0.000 5,750.00 0.000 2,384.38 0.000 2,850.00 16,378.13 0.00 2,812.50 0.00 0.00 2,581.25 0.00 0.00 5,750.00 0.00 0.00 2,384.38 0.00 0.00 2,850.00 0.00 0.00 16,378.13 0.00 Chandler Asset Management - CONFIDENTIAL Page 7 Execution Time: 9/2/2016 12:18:29 AM , I City of National City Consolidated Account #10218 Transaction Ledger 7/31/16 Thru 8/31/16 Transaction Settlement Type Date Security Description Acq/Disp Price Yield Amount Interest Pur/Sold Total Amount Gain/Loss OTHER TRANSACTIONS Dividend 08/02/2016 60934N807 Subtotal 17,679.24 Federated Prime Value Oblig Govt Oblig Fund Inst. 17,679.24 0.000 0.31 0.00 0.31 0.00 0.31 0.00 0.31 0.00 TOTAL OTHER TRANSACTIONS 2,747,679.24 16,378.44 0.00 16,378.44 0.00 co co O_ 0) 0) Chandler Asset Management - CONFIDENTIAL Page 8 Execution Time: 9/2/2016 12:18:29 AM CC/CDC-HA Agenda 10/18/2016 — Page 94 The following page(s) contain the backup material for Agenda Item: Warrant Register #11 for the period of 09/07/16 through 09/13/16 in the amount of $1,970,029.42. (Finance) 94 of 669 CITY OF NATIONAL CITY, CALIFORNIA COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT MEETING DATE: October 18, 2016 AGENDA ITEM NO. ITEM TITLE: Warrant Register #11 for the period of 09/07/16 through 09/13/16 in the amount of $1,970,029.42. (Finance) PREPARED BY: K. Apalategui PHONE: 619-336-4572. DEPARTMENT: Finance APPROVED BY: 1// EXPLANATION: Per Government Section Code 37208, attached are the warrants issued for the period of 09/07/16 through 09/13/16. Consistent with Department of Finance, listed below are all payments above $50,000. Vendor Check/Wire Amount Explanation Folsom Lake Ford 325269 220,229.00 2016 Ford Explorer / Police SDG&E 325331 66,292.07 Facilities Division Gas & Electric Utilities Whillock Contracting 325353 93,453.40 Playhouse Demolition Project Public Emp Ret System 9082016 408,827.48 Service Period 08/16/16 — 08/29/16 FINANCIAL STATEMENT: ACCOUNT NO. Warrant total $1,970,029.42. APPROVED: APPROVED: ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW: This is not a project and, therefore, not subject to environmental review. ORDINANCE: INTRODUCTION: FINAL ADOPTION: STAFF RECOMMENDATION: :Ratify warrants totaling $1,970,029.42 BOARD / COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION:, N/A ATTACHMENTS: Warrant Register ##11 Finance MIS 95 of 669 I 1/3 PAYEE DUNBAR ARMORED INC ENTERPRISE FLEET MANAGEMENT FOLSOM LAKE FORD FUN FLICKS OUTDOOR MOVIES ADMINSURE INC ADMINSURE INC AIRGAS WEST ALDEMCO ALL FRESH PRODUCTS ALL THE KINGS FLAGS AT&T AZTEC APPLIANCE BLACK, N BOGLE, J BROADWAY AUTO ELECTRIC CITY OF NATIONAL CITY CITY OF SAN DIEGO CLF WAREHOUSE COMMERCIAL AQUATIC SERVICE INC COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO COX COMMUNICATIONS CWEA MEMBERSHIP CYNTHIA TITGEN CONSULTING INC DANIELS TIRE SERVICE DIAZ, E D-MAX ENGINEERING DOCUFLOW SOLUTIONS INC EQUIFAX INFORMATION SVCS ERUM, R FON JON PET CARE CENTER FORTEL TRAFFIC INC GOVCONNECTION INC GRAINGER GROSSMAN PSYCHOLOGICAL GTC SYSTEMS INC HONEYWELL INTERNATIONAL INC JM NATIONAL CITY SD LLC KIMBLE, R KONICA MINOLTA KREPPS, B LAFRENIERE, M LASER SAVER INC MADAMBA, J MATLOCK, J MELLADO DESIGNS METRO AUTO PARTS DISTRIBUTOR NAN MCKAY AND ASSOC INC MATTHEWS, N OFFICE SOLUTIONS BUSINESS WARRANT REGISTER #11 9/13/2016 DESCRIPTION CHK NO PATE AMOUNT ARMORED SERVICES / FINANCE 325267 9/8/16 655.16 ENTERPRISE FLEET LEASE AND MANAGEMENT 325268 9/8116 14,516.51 2016 FORD EXPLORER / POLICE 325269 9/8/16 220,299.00 PREMIERE MOVIE SCREEN / CSD 325270 9/8/16 1,149.00 WC CLAIMS ADMINISTRATION / AUGUST 325271 9/13/16 10,800.33 WC CLAIMS ADMINISTRATION / SEPT 325272 9/13/16 6,948.33 MOP#45714 SUPPLIES / PW 325273 9/13/16 537.99 FOOD / NUTRITION CENTER 325274 9/13(16 3,349.27 FOOD / NUTRITION CENTER 325275 9/13/16 755.27 CITY WIDE FLAGS & ACCESSORIES / PW 325276 9/13/16 256.80 AT&T SBC ANNUAL PHONE SERVICE FOR FY17 325277 9)13/16 357.32 CITY WIDE APPLIANCE PURCHASES FOR FY 326278 9/13/16 535,68 EDUCATION REIMBURSEMENT 325279 9/13/16 150.00 EDUCATION REIMBURSEMENT 325280 9/13/16 150.00 MOP#72447 SUPPLIES / PW 325281 9/13/16 272.50 PETTY CASH REPLENISHMENT 1 JULY 2016 325282 9/13/16 647.53 TRANSPORTATION / TREATMENT FEES OF SEWER 325283 9/13/16 944.25 MOP#80331 SUPPLIES / PW 325284 9/13/16 380.16 CHEMICAL SUPPLIES FOR POOL/ PW 325285 9113116 6,157.30 REGIONAL COMMUNICATIONS SYSTEMS JULY 2016 325286 9/13/16 8,167.50 COX DATA SERVICES / SEPTEMBER 325287 9/13116 4,044.38 MEMBERSHIP-CWEA / PW 325288 9/13/16 184.00 WC CONSULTING SERVICES / AUGUST 2016 325289 9/13/16 2,625.00 MOP#76896 TIRES 1 PW 325290 9/13/16 226.75 EDUCATION REIMBURSEMENT 325291 9113/16 150.00 N.C. CALFIRE URBAN F. PROJECT 325292 9/13/16 8,085,00 REPAIR TYPEWRITER / FINANCE 325293 9/13/16 155.00 CREDIT CHECK SERVICES / SEC 8 325294 9/13/16 152.33 REFUND OF DEPOSIT OF T&A 90136 325295 9/13/16 1,329.24 GROOMING OF K9 / PD 325296 9/13/16 630.00 SERVICE AND MAINTENANCE FOR TRAFFIC SIGN 325297 9/13/16 7,246.98 CISCO CATALYST 3850 4-8-PORT FULL POE IP / MIS 325298 9/13/16 13,173.60 MOP#65179 SUPPLIES / PW 325299 9113116 1,187.82 PRE EMPLOYMENT PSYCHOLOGICAL TEST / PD 325300 9/13/16 1.375.00 TEMP DESKTOP SUPPORT SERVICES / MIS 325301 9/13/16 600.00 CITY WIDE HVAC MAINTENANCE 1 PW 325302 9/13/16 30,390.00 FOOD FOR INSTRUCTORS / FIRE 325303 9/13/16 315.00 RETIREE HEALTH BENEFITS / AUG 2016 325304 9/13/16 300.00 COPIER EQUIPMENT LEASE / AUGUST 2016 325305 9/13/16 2,078.23 EDUCATION REIMBURSEMENT 325306 9/13/16 630.00 EDUCATION REIMBURSEMENT 325307 9/13/16 150.00 MOP 45725 INK CARTRIDGES / MIS 325308 9/13/16 1,475.00 REIMB/SUBDIVISION MAP ACT CLASS/PLANNING 325309 9/13/16 18.24 EDUCATION REIMBURSEMENT 325310 9/13/16 388-48 T-SHIRTS 1 CM SOTELO-SOLIS 325311 9/13/16 132.84 MOP#75943 SHOP SUPPLIES / PW 325312 9/13/16 208.63 SHIPPING / HOUSING REGULATIONS CD / SECS 325313 9/13/16 25.00 ADV ALLOWANCE AFT POST SUB / PD 325314 9/13/16 335,50 CHAIR / NSD 96 Of 669 325315 9/13/16 769.54 �-+ CALI 1 O,RNf iA. 2/3 PAYEE ONLC TRAINING CENTERS PACIFIC PRODUCTS & SERVICES PACIFIC SAFETY CENTER PCS MOBILE PENSKE FORD POWERSTRIDE BATTERY CO INC PRO B !LD PROJECT PROFESSIONALS CORP PRUDENTIAL OVERALL SUPPLY RANDALL LAMB ASSOCIATES INC SAM'S ALIGNMENT SERVICE SAN DIEGO FRICTION PRODUCTS SAN DIEGO CAS & ELECTRIC SAN DIEGO UNION TRIBUNE SANCHEZ, E SDG&E SEAPORT MEAT COMPANY SHERWIN WILLIAMS SIMPLEXGRINNELL LP SITEONE LANDSCAPE SUPPLY LLC SMART & FINAL SOUTHERN CALIF TRUCK STOP SPEEDPRESS STAPLES BUSINESS ADVANTAGE STAPLES BUSINESS ADVANTAGE SUPERIOR READY MIX SWEETWATER AUTHORITY SYSCO SAN DIEGO INC T MAN TRAFFIC SUPPLY THOMSON REUTERS WEST TOPECO PRODUCTS U S BANK U 5 HEALTHWORKS VERIZON WIRELESS VISTA PAINT WAXIE SANITARY SUPPLY WESTFLEX INDUSTRIAL WHILLOCK CONTRACTING WILLY'S ELECTRONIC SUPPLY ABLE PATROL & GUARD AMAZON BAKER & TAYLOR EBSCO INFORMATION SERVICES LIEU, C MIDWEST TAPE SMART & FINAL STAPLES BUSINESS ADVANTAGE U S POSTMASTER NATION WARRANT REGISTER #11 9/13/2016 DESCRIPTION NETWORKING COURSES / MIS TRAFFIC SUPPLIES / PW ANNUAL MEMBERSHIP RENEWAL / PW RETROFIT TO GPS AND 4G AT&T LTE/ MIS MOP#49078 SHOP SUPPLIES / PW MOP#67839 SHOP SUPPLIES / PW MOP#i5707 SUPPLIES / PW EL TOYON SQUAD PRESENTATION / FD MOP#45742 LAUNDRY / PW CORRECTIVE ACTION PHASE PROJECT MOP#72442 AUTO PARTS / PW MOP#80333 AUTO PARTS / PW GAS & ELECTRIC UTILITIES / NUTRITION PUBLIC NOTICING/PLANNING COMMISSION EDUCATION REIMBURSEMENT FACILITIES DIVISION GAS & ELECTRIC UTILITIES MEAT / NUTRITION CENTER MOP#77816 PAINT SUPPLIES / PW RIBBON FOR TIME STAMP MACHINE MOP#69277 HORTICULTURAL ITEMS / PW MOP 45756. SUPPLIES FOR FIRE DEPT MOP#45758 SUPPLIES / PW FITS GRAPHTEC / PW MOP #45704 COPY PAPER MOP 45704. OFFICE SUPPLIES / RISK TACK OIL, 3/8 SHEET AND COLD MIX STREETS DIVISION WATER UTILITIES FOOD / NUTRITION CENTER MOP#76666 TRAFFIC SUPPLIES / PW ONLINE LEGAL RESEARCH / JULY 2016 MOP#63849 AUTO PARTS / PW CREDIT CARD EXPENSES/PD PRE -EMPLOYMENT PHYSICAL EXAMS VERIZON CELLULAR SERVICE / AUG 2016 MOP#68834 PAINT SUPPLIES / PW MISCELLANEOUS JANITORIAL SUPPLIES / PW MOP#63850 AUTO SUPPLIES / PW PLAYHOUSE DEMOLITION PROJECT MOP45763 - ELECTRICAL SUPPLIES / MIS SECURITY GUARD SERVICES / LIBRARY BOOKS / LIBRARY BOOKS / LIBRARY ON-LINE SUBSCRIPTIONS / LIBRARY MATERIALS FOR TUTORS & LEARNERS / LIBRARY DVD'S / LIBRARY MOP #45756 - SUPPLIES / LIBRARY MOP#45704 - SUPPLIES / LIBRARY POSTAGE FOR OVERDUE NOTICES / LIBRARY 97 of 669 CHK NO DATE AMQUNT 325316 9/13/16 9,876.05 325317 9/13/16 9,222.42 325318 9/13/16 145.00 325319 9/13/16 4,905.00 325320 9/13/16 214.30 325321 9/13/16 154.50 325322 9/13/18 1,144.13 325323 9/13/16 4,522.50 325324 9/13/16 472.24 325325 9/13/16 825.00 325326 9113/16 180.00 325327 9/13/16 48.49 325328 9/13/16 204.51 325329 9/13116 475.80 325330 9/13/16 103.00 325331 9/13/16 66,292.07 325332 9/13/16 834.16 325333 9/13116 1,531.25 325334 9/13/16 157.60 325335 9/13/16 1,480.29 325336 9/13/16 41.90 325337 9/13/16 97.01 325338 9/13/16 239.55 325339 9/13/16 210.69 325340 9/13/16 514.59 325341 9/13/16 332.86 325342 9/13/16 471.66 325343 9/13/16 5,189.98 325344 9/13/16 493.77 325345 9/13/16 967.44 325346 9/13/16 41.28 325347 9/13/16 958.54 325348 9/13/16 506.00 325349 9/13/16 150.37 325350 9/13116 2,165.24 325351 9/13/16 166.82 325352 9/13/16 617.66 325353 9/13/16 93,453.40 325354 9/13/16 492.65 325355 9/13/16 3,363.10 325356 9/13/16 175.50 325357 9/13/16 526.88 325358 9/13/16 16,899.00 325359 9/13/16 150.68 325360 9/13/16 349.29 325361 9/13/16 118.13 325362 9/13/16 760.00 325363 9/13/16 98.00 AMP Total 587,751.76 * C:AI 1FO.:.NiA.:+0r- 3/3 PAYEE WIRED PAYMENTS PUBLIC EMP RETIREMENT SYSTEM SECTION 8 HAPS PAYROLL Pay period 19 WARRANT REGISTER #11 9/13/2016 pESCRIPnoN CHK NO DATE AMOUNT SERVICE PERIOD OS/16/16 - 08/29/16 9082016 9/8f16 Start Date End Date 9/7/2019 9/13/2016 Start Date End Date Check Date 8/30/2016 9/12/2016 9/21 /2016 408,827,46 9,079.07 964,371.11 GRAND TOTAL $1,970,029.42 98 of 669 Certification IN ACCORDANCE WITH SECTION 37202, 37208, 372059 OF THE GOVERNMENT CODE, WE HEREBY CERTIFY TO THE ACCURACY OF THE DEMANDS LISTED ABOVE AND TO THE AVAILABILITY OF FUNDS FOR THE PAYMENT THEREOF AND FURTHER THAT THE ABOVE CLAIMS AND DEMANDS HAVE BEEN AUDITED AS REQUIRED BY LAW. MARK ROBERRS, FINANCE LESLIE DEESE, CITY MANAGER FINANCE COMMITTEE RONALD J. MORRISON, MAYOR -CHAIRMAN JERRY CANO, VICE -MAYOR ALEJANDRA SOTELO-SOLIS, MEMBER MONA RIOS, MEMBER ALBERT MENDIVIL, MEMBER I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THE FOREGOING CLAIMS AND DEMANDS WERE APPROVED AND THE CITY 'TREASURER IS AUTHORIZED TO ISSUE SAID WARRANTS IN PAYMENT THEREOF BY THE CITY COUNCIL ON TIIE 1811' OF OCiOBER, 2016. AYES NAYS ABSENT 99 of 669 CC/CDC-HA Agenda 10/18/2016 — Page 100 The following page(s) contain the backup material for Agenda Item: Warrant Register #12 for the period of 09/14/16 through 09/20/16 in the amount of $1,379,544.19. (Finance) 100 of 669 CITY OF NATIONAL CITY, CALIFORNIA COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT MEETING DATE: October 18, 2016 AGENDA ITEM NO. ITEM TITLE: Warrant Register #12 for the period of 09/14/16 through 09/20/16 in the amount of $1,379,544.19. (Finance) PREPARED BY: :K. Apalategui PHONE: 619-336-4572 EXPLANATION: Per Government Section Code 37208, attached are the warrants issued for the period of 09/14/16 through 09/20/16. Consistent with Department of Finance, listed below are all payments above $50,000. Vendor Folsom Lake Ford CheckiWire 325370 Fordyce Construction Inc 325371 Innovative Construction 325374 West Tech Contracting Inc 325390 Western Rim Constructors 325391 Amount 219,038.99 126,410.78 62,927.00 467,172.18 334,331.94 DEPARTMENT: Finan APPROVED BY: C� Explanation 2016 Ford Explorer / Police Las Palmas/Pool/Gym Project / Eng Kimball Park Project / Eng Paradise Creek Restoration Project / Eng Kimball, El Toyon/Skate Park Project / Eng FINANCIAL STATEMENT: ACCOUNT NO. Warrant total $1,379,544.19. APPROVED: if Finance APPROVED: MIS ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW: This is not a project and, therefore, not subject to environmental review. ORDINANCE: INTRODUCTION: FINAL ADOPTION: STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Ratify warrants totaling $1,379,544.19. BOARD / COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION: NIA ATTACHMENTS: Warrant Register #12 101 of 669 1/1 PAYEE PARADISE PRINTING & GRAPHICS AETNA RESOURCES FOR LIVING ASPEN RISK MANAGEMENT GROUP CHILDREN'S HOSPITAL CIRCULATE SAN DIEGO D-MAX ENGINEERING FOLSOM LAKE FORD FORDYCE CONSTRUCTION INC GRANICUS INC HARRIS & ASSOCIATES INNOVATIVE CONSTRUCTION IRON MOUNTAIN KIMLEY HORN AND ASSOC INC KTU&A MUTHUSAMY, K OFFICE SOLUTIONS BUSINESS PROJECT PROFESSIONALS CORP RANDALL LAMB ASSOCIATES INC RELY ENVIRONMENTAL SAN DIEGO UNION TRIBUNE SCST INC SDLRLA TELLEZ, J U S BANK WAVETEC CONSTRUCTION WAXIE SANITARY SUPPLY WEST TECH CONTRACTING INC WESTERN RIM CONSTRUCTORS INC WILLY'S ELECTRONIC SUPPLY WTS SAN DIEGO KLEINFELDER PARKER, D WIRED PAYMENTS PAYCHEX BENEFIT TECHNOLOGIES ARCO BUSINESS SOLUTIONS SECTION 8 HAPS PAYMENTS CAt4F0:RNlA a01 , , I It L - : thiE Pd> ATVW WARRANT REGISTER #12 9/20/2016 DESCRIPTION CHK NO SCHOOL CALENDARS / PD 325364 EMPLOYEE ASSISTANCE PROGRAM I SEPT 2016 325365 RISK MGMT FIELD VISIT OBSERVATIONS JUNE 2016 325366 NC SAFE ROUTE TO SCHOOL PROJECT / ENG 325367 ACTIVE TRANSPORTATION PROJECT STORMWATER SERVICES 2015-2016 2016 FORD EXPLORER / POLICE LAS PALMAS /POOL/GYM PROJECT I ENG MONTHLY MANAGED SERVICE / MIS ON -CALL PROJECT SUPPORT SERVICES KIMBALL PARK PROJECT / ENG DOCUMENT MANAGEMENT & STORAGE EL TOYON - LAS PALMAS BIKE PROJECT PLAZA BLVD, CONST. ADMINIST. PROJECT MILEAGE REIMB FOR OFFSITE MEETINGS / ENG MOBILE TRAINING TABLE / COUNCIL CHAMBERS PARADISE CREEK ED. PROJECT N.C. FACILITIES MAINT, PROJECT ON -CALL ENVIRONMENTAL MGM SERVICES LEGAL NOTICE ADVERTISING DIVISION STREET PROJECT ASSOCIATION MEMBERSHIP / R. MORRISON REIMB: COLORADO MARIJUANA IMPACT / PD CREDIT CARD EXPENSES / FIRE 726 W. 19TH ET. PROJECT JANITORIAL SUPPLIES / PW PARADISE CREEK RESTORATION PROJECT / ENG 325390 KIMBALL, EL TOYON & SKATE PARK PROJECT / ENG 325391 MOP #45763 ELECTRICAL SUPPLIES / PW 325392 WTS SD ANNUAL AWARDS GALA / MORRISON 325393 STATE OF THE CITY PRODUCTION & EDITING 325394 BENETRAC ESR SVCS BASE FEE SEP 2016 FUEL FOR CITY FLEET AUGUST 2016 Start Date End Date 9/14/2016 9/20/2016 DATE AMOUNT 9/20/16 7,342.92 9/20/16 801.92 9/20/16 8,100.00 9/20/16 22,780.92 32536E 9/20/16 1,801.74 325369 9/20/16 27,638,32 325370 9/20/16 219,038.99 325371 9/20/16 125,410.78 325372 9/20/16 1,477.35 325373 9/20/16 520.00 325374 9/20/16 62,927.00 325375 9/20/16 167.21 325376 9/20/16 3,211.22 325377 9/20/16 326.25 325378 9/20/16 112.22 325379 9/20/16 304.11 325380 9/20/16 5,835.00 325381 9/20/16 4,682.50 325382 9/20/16 4,152.50 325383 9/20/16 210.20 325384 9120/16 16,851.00 325385 9/20/16 100.00 325386 9/20/16 194.12 325387 9/20/16 669,79 325388 9/20/16 31,988.00 325389 9/20/16 774.34 9/20/16 467,172.18 9/20/16 334,331.94 9/20/16 26.05 9/20/16 95.00 9/20/16 500.00 ALP Total 1,350,543.57 668275 9/16/16 418.00 934836 9/14/16 25,677.62 2,905.00 GRAND TOTAL $1,379,544.19 102 of 669 Certification IN ACCORDANCE WITH SECTION 37202, 37208, 372059 OF THE GOVERNMENT CODE, WE HEREBY CERTIFY TO THE ACCURACY OF THE DEMANDS LISTED ABOVE AND TO THE AVAILABILITY OF FUNDS FOR THE PAYMENT THEREOF AND FURTHER TI-IAT THE ABOVE CLAIMS AND DEMANDS HAVE BEEN AUDITED AS REQUIRED BY LAW. 1/1/ 'MARK ROBERTS_ FINANCE LESLIE DEESE, CITY MANAGER FINANCE COMMITTEE RONALD J. MORRISON, MAYOR-CliAti MAN JERRY CANO, VICE -MAYOR ALEJANDRA SOTELO-SOLIS, MEMBER MONA RIOS, MEMBER ALBERT MENDIVIL., MEMBER I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THE FOREGOING CLAIMS AND DEMANDS WERE APPROVED AND THE CITY TREASURER I5 AUTHOREZED TO ISSUE SAID WARRANTS IN PAYMENT THEREOF BY THE CITY COUNCIL ON THE 15th OF OCTOBER, 2016. AYES NAYS ABSENT 103 of 669 CC/CDC-HA Agenda 10/18/2016 — Page 104 The following page(s) contain the backup material for Agenda Item: An Ordinance of the City Council of the City of National City adding Chapter 10.14 to Title 10 of the National City Municipal Code to Prohibit all Commercial Marijuana Activity in the City of National City, Regulate the Cultivation of Recreational Marijua 104 of 669 CITY OF NATIONAL CITY, CALIFORNIA COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT MEETING DATE: October 18, 2016 AGENDA ITEM NO. ITEM TITLE: An Ordinance of the City Council of the City of National City adding Chapter 10.14 to Title 10 of the National City Municipal Code to Prohibit all Commercial Marijuana Activity in the City of National City, Regulate the Cultivation of Recreational Marijuana for Personal Use, and Regulate the Possession of Recreational Marijuana in anticipation of Proposition 64, the Control, Regulate, and Tax Adult Use of Marijuana Act ("AUMA"), passing on November 8, 2016. PREPARED BY: Nicole Pedone DEPARTMENT: C' lorney PHONE: Ext. 4221 APPROVED BY: EXPLANATION: Please see attached staff report. FINANCIAL STATEMENT: APPROVED: ACCOUNT NO. APPROVED: Not applicable. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW: This activity is not a project as defined in Section 15378 of the California Code of Regulations; therefore, no further action is required under the California Environmental Quality Act. ORDINANCE: INTRODUCTION: FINAL ADOPTION: Finance MIS STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Introduce proposed ordinance. BOARD / COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION: INot applicable. ATTACHMENTS: Staff Report Exhibit 1 - Memorandum written by the League of California Cities Exhibit 2 - Rocky Mountain High Drug Trafficking Area Report Exhibit 3 - California Police Chiefs Association Findings on Marijuana Use Exhibit 4 - Additional References and SourceQ 105ot6b9 \\1/ 40 CALIFORNIA NATO N.L Cin am? ---:- moo...warm City Council Staff Report October 18, 2016 ITEM An Urgency Ordinance of the City Council Pursuant to California Government Code Sections 36934 and 36937 adding Chapter 10.14 to Title 10 of the National City Municipal Code to Prohibit all Commercial Marijuana Activity in the City of National City, Regulate the Cultivation of Recreational Marijuana for Personal Use, and Regulate the Possession of Recreational Marijuana in anticipation of and contingent upon Proposition 64, the Control, Regulate, and Tax Adult Use of Marijuana Act ("AUMA"), passing on November 8, 2016. If this proposed urgency ordinance is approved, it would become effective and be in force if the AUMA passes on November 8, 2016. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Introduce Urgency Ordinance to add Chapter 10.14 to Title 10 of the National City Municipal Code to Prohibit all Commercial Marijuana Activity in the City of National City, Regulate the Cultivation of Recreational Marijuana for Personal Use, and Regulate the Possession of Recreational Marijuana in anticipation of Proposition 64, the Control, Regulate, and Tax Adult Use of Marijuana Act ("AUMA"), passing on November 8, 2016 to be effective in the event AUMA passes on November 8, 2016. Adoption of an Urgency Ordinance requires a 4l5 vote of the City Council. BACKGROUND AND OVERVIEW OF THE CONTROL, REGULATE, AND TAX ADULT USE OF MARIJUANA ACT ("AUMA") The following background information is largely taken from a memorandum written by the League of California Cities' (the entirety of the memorandum as well as a chart is attached as Exhibit 1): 1 The League of California Cities mission statement reads as follows: "To expand and protect local control for cities through education and advocacy to enhance the quality of life for all Californians." 0 2016 League of California Cities 106 of 669 On November 8, 2016, AUMA will come before California voters as Proposition 64. If passed, the AUMA will legalize the nonmedical use of marijuana by persons 21 years of age and over, and the personal cultivation of up to six marijuana plants. In addition, the AUMA will create a state regulatory and licensing system governing the commercial cultivation, testing, and distribution of nonmedical marijuana, and the manufacturing of nonmedical marijuana products. A. Personal Nonmedical Marijuana Use The AUMA makes it legal for persons 21 years of age or older to: (1) smoke or ingest marijuana or marijuana products; (2) possess, process, transport, purchase, obtain, or give away to persons 21 years of age or older, without any compensation, 28.5 grams of marijuana, or 8 grams of concentrated marijuana, including as contained in marijuana products; and (3) possess, plant, cultivate, harvest, dry or process up to six living marijuana plants for personal use.2 The AUMA requires that marijuana in excess of 28.5 grams that is produced by plants kept pursuant to the personal cultivation provision of the Act be kept in a locked space on the grounds of a private residence that is not visible from a public place.3 Although persons 21 years of age or older may use and possess nonmedical marijuana under the Act, their ability to engage in these activities is not unfettered. The AUMA prohibits the smoking of marijuana: (1) in any public place, except where a local jurisdiction has authorized use on the premises of a retailer or microbusiness in accordance with Business and Professions Code section 26200; (2) where smoking tobacco is prohibited; (3) within 1,000 feet of a school, day care center, or youth center while children are present; and (3) while driving, or riding in the passenger seat of, any vehicle used for transportation.4 Moreover, individuals cannot possess marijuana on school grounds, in day care centers, or in youth centers while children are present, or possess an open container of marijuana or marijuana products while driving, operating, or riding in any vehicle used for transportation.5 The AUMA further provides that cities may prohibit possession and smoking in buildings owned, leased, or occupied by the city, and that employers, including cities, may maintain a drug and alcohol free workplace by prohibiting the use, consumption, possession, transfer, transportation, sale, display or growth of marijuana in the workplace.6 B. Personal Cultivation The AUMA provides that local governments can reasonably regulate, but cannot ban, personal indoor cultivation of up to six living marijuana plants within the person's private residence.' The Act defines private residence as "a house, an apailiuent unit, a 2 Health & Safety Code §11362.2(a) 3 Health & Safety Code §11362.2(a)(2) 4 Health & Safety Code § 11362.3(7)-(8) 5 Health & Safety Code §11362.3(3), 11362.3(4) 6 Health & Safety Code §11362.45(f)-(g) ' Health & Safety Code §11362.1(a)(3), 11362.2 Staff Report Ordinance Adding Chapter 10.14 107 of 669 mobile home, or other similar dwelling unit."8 This includes cultivation in a greenhouse on the same property as the residence that is not physically part of the home, as long as it is fully enclosed, secure, and not visible from a public space.9 The AUMA completely protects the ability of local governments to regulate, and to ban, personal outdoor cultivation operations.10 However, it purports to repeal any ordinance that bans outdoor cultivation upon the California Attorney General's determination that nonmedical use of marijuana is lawful under federal law.11 C. Commercial Nonmedical Marijuana Activity Under the AUMA, California will have a comprehensive state regulatory system for nonmedical marijuana that governs the industry from "seed to sale." The Bureau of Marijuana Control, currently the Bureau of Medical Cannabis Regulation, which is within the Department of Consumer Affairs, will have primary responsibility for administering and enforcing the AUMA.12 The AUMA divides state licensing and enforcement responsibilities among three agencies: (1) the Department of Consumer Affairs, which will issue licenses for the transportation, storage, distribution, and sale of marijuana;13 (2) the Department of Food and Agriculture will issue marijuana cultivation licenses, which will administer the provisions of the AUMA related to the cultivation of marijuana;14 and (3) the Department of Public Health, which will issue licenses for marijuana manufacturers and testing laboratories.15 Each of these state licensing authorities is responsible for creating regulations governing their respective areas of responsibility, and must begin issuing licenses by January 1, 2018.16 A state marijuana license will be valid for one year.l7 A separate state license is required for each commercial marijuana business location.18 With the exception of testing facilities, any person or entity licensed under the AUMA may apply for and be issued more than one type of state license.19 8 Health & Safety Code §11362.2(5) 9 Health & Safety Code § 1.1362.2(a)(2) 1° Health & Safety Code §11362.2(b)(3) 11 Health & Safety Code §11362.2(b)(4) 12 Business & Professions Code §26010 13 Business and Professions Code § 26012(a)(1) 14 Business and Professions Code § 26012(a)(2) 15 Business and Professions Code § 26012(3) 16 Business and Professions Code § 26012(c), 26013(a) "Business and Professions Code § 26050(c) 18 Business and Professions Code § 26055(c) 19 Business and Professions Code § 26053 Staff Report Ordinance Adding Chapter 10.14 108 of 669 D. Local Control All nonmedical marijuana businesses must have a state license.20 A state license cannot issue to an applicant whose operations would violate the provisions of any local ordinance or regulation.21 However, a state applicant need not provide documentation that the applicant has a local license or permit. The AUMA does not limit the authority of a local jurisdiction to adopt and enforce local ordinances regulating or completely prohibiting state -licensed marijuana businesses 22 Local jurisdictions may establish "standards, requirements, and regulations regarding health and safety, environmental protection, testing, security, food safety, and worker protections that exceed state standards."' E. Local Enforcement AUMA establishes a dual enforcement scheme for commercial marijuana activities that violate either state or local laws. The state licensing authorities will enforce state statutes and regulations. State authorities can suspend or revoke state licenses,24 pursue civil penalties against violating businesses in an amount equal to three times the applicable licensing fee per violation,25 or may prosecute violators criminally.26 Local authorities will be responsible for enforcing local ordinances and regulations.27 For state -licensed facilities operating within a city, a city may have authority to enforce state law and regulations "if delegated the power to do so by the [B]ureau [of Marijuana Control] or a licensing authority.�28 The AUMA does not require an applicant to provide evidence of local permission prior to being issued a state license.29 Instead, the AUMA prohibits state licensing entities from approving licenses for activities that would violate local ordinances.30 Thus, state licensing officials bear the onus of evaluating local regulatory compliance. PROPOSED ORDINANCE Chapter 10.14, titled "Recreational Marijuana" would be added to Title 10, Public Peace, Morals, and Safety under section III. titled Offenses Against Health and Safety. This ordinance would prohibit all commercial marijuana activity in the city including the licensing and operation of any marijuana cultivation facilities, marijuana product 2° Business and Professions Code § 26038 21 Business and Professions Code § 26055(e) 22 Business and Professions Code § 26200(a); but see, Business and Professions Code §§ 19340(f), 26080(b), 26090(c) which prohibits cities from preventing the use of public roads to lawfully transport or deliver nonmedical marijuana. 23 Business and Professions Code § 26201 24 Business and Professions Code § 2603 25 Business and Professions Code § 26038(a) 26 Business and Professions Code § 26038(c) 27 Business and Professions Code § 26200(b) 28 Business and Professions Code § 23202(a) �9 Business and Professions Code § 26056 30 Business and Professions Code § 26055(e) Staff Report Ordinance Adding Chapter 10.14 109 of 669 manufacturing facilities, marijuana testing facilities, marijuana delivery businesses, marijuana storage facilities, retail marijuana stores, and marijuana establishments. All outdoor cultivation of marijuana would also be prohibited and in accordance with proposed Health and Safety code section 11362.2(a), not more than six plants may be cultivated within a single private residence. The possession, display, consumption, sale or use of recreational marijuana will be prohibited in or upon any public area, public park and public building and the smoking of marijuana will prohibited anywhere the smoking of tobacco is prohibited and as otherwise prohibited in proposed Health and Safety section 11362.3. The ordinance will also make it unlawful for any person to purchase marijuana or to sell to any person under the age of 21 years old. If this proposed urgency ordinance is approved, it would become effective and be in force in the event AUMA passes on November 8, 2016. ENFORCEMENT Violations of this ordinance could result in prosecution in accordance with Title 1 of the National City Municipal Code and may be enforced through injunctive relief or any other relief available by law, including civil or criminal prosecution. Penalties may result in a misdemeanor citation for each day in violation, punishable by a maximum of one year in jail and a one thousand dollar fine. Violations of the ordinance are declared to be a public nuisance and may be abated by the City in accordance with the law and as provided for under the National City Municipal Code. Enforcement efforts will be done by a combination of police officers, code compliance Officers, the fire marshal, or any other city official authorized to enforce any provision of the municipal code. URGENCY ORDINANCE This ordinance is necessary for the immediate preservation of the public peace, health, and safety due to the impending vote on November 8, 2016 in which Proposition 64 is anticipated to pass with a majority vote legalizing the recreational use of marijuana. The city already bans all medical marijuana dispensaries and cultivation regardless of purpose. The cultivation, transportation, distribution, and sale of recreational marijuana can create problems related to crime, public health, and safety, water and air quality and energy consumption. Marijuana creates nuisance activity such as loitering and criminal activity in business and residential districts. In addition, equipment utilized to grow marijuana indoors can pose a risk of fire. The negative impacts of the legalization of recreational marijuana are significant as documented by the findings after Colorado legalized marijuana. 31 31 See attached Rocky Mountain High Drug Trafficking Area (RMHIDTA) September 2015 (Volume 3) Report, Exhibit 2. Staff Report Ordinance Adding Chapter 10.14 5 110 of 669 • Impaired Driving o a 32% increase in marijuana -related traffic deaths in 2014, when retail marijuana businesses began operating, there was in just one year from 2013. o 92% increase from 2010-2014 in marijuana -related traffic deaths 8% for all other traffic deaths in that period. o 45% increase in positive marijuana results of active THC results for primarily driving under the influence since 2014, when retail marijuana business began operating. • Youth Marijuana Use o 11.16% of Colorado youth ages 12 to 17 years old were considered current marijuana users compared to 7.15% nationally in 2013. o Colorado ranked 3111 in the nation and was 56% higher than the national average. o 40% increase during the school years 2008 — 2014 in Drug -related suspensions / expulsions, the majority were marijuana violations. o A 2015 survey of school resource and school counselors revealed similar results about increased marijuana issues since recreational marijuana was legalized. • Adult Marijuana Use o 29% of college age students (18-25 years old) in 2013, were considered current marijuana users compared to 18.91 % nationally. o Colorado ranked 2nd in the nation, 54% higher than the national average. o 10.13% of adults ages 26 years and up in 2013 were considered current marijuana uses compared to 5.45% nationally. Colorado ranked 5th in the nation for current marijuana use among adults (85.87 percent higher than the national average). o 49% increase of probationers age 18 to 25 years old, were positive for THC. 87% increase in marijuana users ages 26 and older since it was legalized. • Emergency Room Admissions o a 29% increase in the number of marijuana -related emergency room visits and 38% increase in marijuana -related hospitalizations in one year In 2014, when retail marijuana businesses began operating. o a 46% increase in hospitalizations related to marijuana in the three years after medical marijuana was commercialized, compared to the three years prior. o Children's Hospital Colorado reported 16 cases of marijuana ingestions among children under 12 in 2014, compared to 2 in 2009. Staff Report Ordinance Adding Chapter 10.14 111 of 669 • Marijuana -related Exposure Issues o In 2014, when retail marijuana businesses began operating, marijuana - only related exposures increased by 72% in one year. o During the years 2013-2014, the average number of all age exposures was 175 per year. Exposures have doubled since marijuana was legalized in Colorado. o Young children (0-5 years old): 2013-2014, average of 31 exposures per year. • Overall, crime in Denver increased 12.3% from 2012 to 2014. o Colorado increase in marijuana tourism industry. o Huge growing black market and criminal enterprise (15% increase in violent crime). o Residential homes rented specifically for grow use. o Increase in Utilities Theft. o Pesticides / Environmental Impact. o Increased use in public events. o Increase Expenses for citizens (vehicle / health insurance, rental prices) o Not enough revenue to areas impacted for regulation (cities / counties that opt out). In addition, a study released in May 2016 by AAA Foundation for Traffic Research found that fatal crashes involving drivers who recently used marijuana doubled in Washington State after that state legalized the drug. An analysis of the "Adult Use of Marijuana" initiative by the San Diego District Attorney's office points out, "The initiative allows persons convicted of dealing large amounts of controlled substances such as heroin (up to 20,000 individual doses), methamphetamine (up to 10,000 individual doses) to become `legal marijuana dealers'; and the analysis further notes that the initiative permits convicted felony drug dealers who have used children to courier drugs to an adult buyer to be eligible to apply for a California marijuana license. Further, there are no provisions in the initiative to prevent advertising and marketing to children and teens near parks, community centers, child -focused businesses, and community colleges. Besides the increase in crime, deaths, and increased exposure of the drug to our youth, the legalization of the drug presents serious implications to our environment. For instance, each plant requires 6 gallons of water per day in a state that is currently battling a drought and asking residents to conserve. This urgency ordinance is urged for the health and safety of our residents, and in order to commit to the success and positive future of our community youth.32 FISCAL IMPACT None 32 See attached California Police Chiefs Association Findings on Marijuana Use, Exhibit 3, and additional resources and sources, Exhibit 4. Staff Report Ordinance Adding Chapter 10.14 112 of 669 LEAI aUE° G I T I E S 1400 K Street, Suite 400 • Sacramento, California 95814 Phone: 916.658.8200 Fax: 916.658.8240 www.cacities.org MEMORANDUM' To: League of California Cities' City Managers Department League of California Cities' City Attorneys Department From: League Staff Date: September 26, 2016 Re: The Control, Regulate and Tax Adult Use of Marijuana Act On November 8, 2016, the Control, Regulate, and Tax Adult Use of Marijuana Act ("AUMA" or "Act") will come before California voters as Proposition 64. If passed, the AUMA will legalize the nonmedical use of marijuana by persons 21 years of age and over, and the personal cultivation of up to six marijuana plants. In addition, the AUMA will create a state regulatory and licensing system governing the commercial cultivation, testing, and distribution of nonmedical marijuana, and the manufacturing of nonmedical marijuana products. The regulatory system governing these commercial marijuana activities largely mirrors the Medical Marijuana Regulation and Safety Act ("MMRSA"), but there are key differences. This memorandum will provide an overview of the AUMA, highlight the ways in which the AUMA differs from the MMRSA, and identify the issues that cities will need to take action on if the AUMA passes. T. Overview of the AUMA A. Personal Nonmedical Marijuana Use The AUMA makes it legal for persons 21 years of age or older to: (1) smoke or ingest marijuana or marijuana products; (2) possess, process, transport, purchase, obtain, or give away to persons 21 years of age or older, without any compensation, 28.5 grams of marijuana, or 8 grams of concentrated marijuana, including as contained in marijuana products; and (3) possess, plant, cultivate, harvest, dry or process up to six living marijuana plants for personal use.2 The AUMA requires that marijuana in excess of 28.5 grams that is produced by plants kept pursuant to the personal cultivation provision of the Act be kept in a locked space on the grounds of a private residence that is not visible from a public place.3 Although persons 21 years of age or older may use and possess nonmedical marijuana under the Act, their ability to engage in these activities is not unfettered. The AUMA prohibits the smoking DISCLAIMER: These materials are not offered as or intended to be legal advice. Readers should seek the advice of an attorney when confronted with legal issues. Attorneys should perform an independent evaluation of the issues raised in these materials. 2 Health & Saf. Code § 11362.2(a). 3 Health & Saf. Code § 11362.2(a)(2). 1 113 of 669 of marijuana: (1) in any public place, except where a local jurisdiction has authorized use on the premises of a retailer or microbusiness in accordance with Business and Professions Code section 26200; (2) where smoking tobacco is prohibited; (3) within 1,000 feet of a school, day care center, or youth center while children are present; and (3) while driving, or riding in the passenger seat of, any vehicle used for transportation.4 Moreover, individuals cannot possess marijuana on school grounds, in day care centers, or in youth centers while children are present, or possess an open container of marijuana or marijuana products while driving, operating, or riding in any vehicle used for transportation.5 The AUMA further provides that cities may prohibit possession and smoking in buildings owned, leased, or occupied by the city, and that employers, including cities, may maintain a drug and alcohol free workplace by prohibiting the use, consumption, possession, transfer, transportation, sale, display or growth of marijuana in the workplace.6 1. Personal Cultivation The AUMA provides that local governments can reasonably regulate, but cannot ban, personal indoor cultivation of up to six living marijuana plants within the person's private residence.' The Act defines private residence as "a house, an apartment unit, a mobile home, or other similar dwelling unit." s This includes cultivation in a greenhouse on the same property as the residence that is not physically part of the home, as long as it is fully enclosed, secure, and not visible from a public space.9 The AUMA completely protects the ability of local governments to regulate, and to ban, personal outdoor cultivation operations.'D However, it purports to repeal any ordinance that bans outdoor cultivation upon the California Attorney General's determination that nonmedical use of marijuana is lawful under federal law.' B. Commercial Nonmedical Marijuana Activity Under the AUMA, California will have a comprehensive state regulatory system for nonmedical marijuana that governs the industry from "seed to sale." The Bureau of Marijuana Control, currently the Bureau of Medical Cannabis Regulation, which is within the Department of Consumer Affairs, will have primary responsibility for administering and enforcing the AUMA.12 The AUMA divides state licensing and enforcement responsibilities among three agencies: (1) the Department of Consumer Affairs, which will issue licenses for marijuana the transportation, 4 Health & Saf. Code §§ 11362.3; 11362.4, 5 Health & Saf. Code §§ 11362.3(3), 11362.3(4). 6 Health & Saf. Code § 11362.45 (f)-(g). ' Health & Saf. Code §§ 11362.1(a)(3), 11362.2. 8 Health & Saf. Code § 11362.2(5). 9 Health & Saf. Code § 11362.2(a)(2). 10 Health & Saf. Code § 11362.2(b)(3). 11 Health & Saf. Code § 11362.2(b)(4). 12 Bus. & Prof. Code § 26010. 114 of 669 storage, distribution, and sale of marijuana;13 (2) the Department of Food and Agriculture will issue marijuana cultivation licenses, which will administer the provisions of the AUMA related to the cultivation of marijuana;14 and (3) the Department of Public Health, which will issue licenses for marijuana manufacturers and testing laboratories.15 Each of these state licensing authorities is responsible for creating regulations governing their respective areas of responsibility, and must begin issuing licenses by January 1, 2018.1 A state marijuana license will be valid for one year.17 A separate state license is required for each commercial marijuana business location.'S With the exception of testing facilities, any person or entity licensed under the AUMA may apply for and be issued more than one type of state license.19 1. Local Control All nonmedical marijuana businesses must have a state license.20 A state license cannot issue to an applicant whose operations would violate the provisions of any local ordinance or regulation.21 However a state applicant need not provide documentation that the applicant has a local license or permit. The AUMA does not limit the authority of a local jurisdiction to adopt and enforce local ordinances regulating or completely prohibiting state -licensed marijuana businesses.22 Local jurisdictions may establish "standards, requirements, and regulations regarding health and safety, environmental protection, testing, security, food safety, and worker protections that exceed state standards ."23 2. Local Enforcement Like the MMRSA, the AUMA establishes a dual enforcement scheme for commercial marijuana activities that violate either state or local laws. The state licensing authorities will enforce state statutes and regulations. State authorities can suspend or revoke state licenses,24 pursue civil penalties against violating businesses in an amount equal to three times the applicable licensing fee per violation,25 or may prosecute violators criminally.26 Local authorities will be responsible 13 Bus. & Prof. Code § 26012(a)(1). 14 Bus. & Prof. Code § 26012(a)(2). is Bus. & Prof. Code § 26012(3). 16 Bus. & Prof. Code §§ 26012(c), 26013 (a). 17 Bus. & Prof. Code § 26050(c). 18 Bus. & Prof. Code § 26055(c). 19 Bus. & Prof. Code § 26053. 20 Bus. & Prof. Code § 26038.) 21 Bus. &Prof. Code § 26055(e). 22 Bus. & Prof. Code § 26200(a). But see, Bus. & Prof. Code §§ 19340(f), 26080(b), 26090(c) [prohibiting cities from preventing the use of public roads to lawfully transport or deliver nonmedical marijuana]. 23 Bus. & Prof. Code § 26201. 24 Bus. & Prof. Code § 2603. 25 Bus. & Prof. Code § 26038(a) 26 Bus. & Prof. Code § 2603 8(c). 115 of 669 for enforcing local ordinances and regulations.27 For state -licensed facilities operating within a city, a city may have authority to enforce state law and regulations "if delegated the power to do so by the [B]ureau [of Marijuana Control] or a licensing authority.s28 II. Key Differences Between the AUMA and MMRSA A. Licensing The MMRSA established dual licensing of medical marijuana businesses, requiring both local approval and a state license in order for a business to operate legally.29 Specifically, the MMRSA requires applicants to provide the relevant state licensing entity with documentation proving their compliance with local ordinances and regulations.3° The AUMA does not require an applicant to provide evidence of local permission prior to being issued a state license.31 Instead, the AUMA prohibits state licensing entities from approving licenses for activities that would violate local ordinances.32 Thus, state licensing officials bear the onus of evaluating local regulatory compliance. Under this system, the AUMA allows a nonmedical marijuana business licensed by the state to operate within city limits unless the city's municipal code prohibits the use. Cities that wish to regulate or prohibit nonmedical marijuana businesses will need to do so before the State begins issuing licenses, either by enacting a nonmedical marijuana ordinance/regulation or by amending an existing medical marijuana ordinance/regulation to include nonmedical marijuana within its scope. B. License Revocation Under the MMRSA, revocation of a local license or permit unilaterally terminates the ability of the medical marijuana business to operate in the jurisdiction issuing the permit, until such time as the local permitting entity reinstates it.33 Under the AUMA, if a local jurisdiction revokes a local license, permit, or authorization for a licensee to engage in commercial marijuana activity within the local jurisdiction, the Bureau of Marijuana Control must initiate proceedings to determine whether the state license issued should be suspended or revoked within ten days of being notified by the local jurisdiction of the local revocation.34 Note, however, that, even if the state license is not suspended or revoked immediately, the business cannot operate within the local jurisdiction once local revocation occurs. 27 Bus. & Prof. Code § 26200 (b). 28 Bus. & Prof. Code § 23202(a). 29 Bus. & Prof. Code § 19320(b). 3o Bus. & Prof. Code § 19322(a). 31 Bus. & Prof. Code § 26056. 32 Bus. & Prof. Code § 26055(e). 33 Bus. & Prof. Code § 19320(d). 34 Bus. & Prof. Code § 26200(c). 4 116 of 669 C. Personal, Indoor Cultivation Under the MMRSA, local governments possess the power to regulate and completely ban personal, indoor cultivation.35 Under the AUMA local governments can "reasonably regulate" indoor cultivation of up to six marijuana plants for personal use, but cannot ban it.36 D. Personal Outdoor Cultivation Under the MMRSA local governments can prohibit all outdoor cultivation. Under the AUMA local governments can prohibit all outdoor cultivation, until such time as the Attorney General determines that the use of nonmedical marijuana is lawful in the State of California under federal law.37 Upon such determination, the AUMA purports to repeal all local bans on outdoor cultivation.38 E. Amendment Any portion of the MMRSA can be amended at any time, if there is sufficient political support within the Legislature for making substantive changes to the regulatory structure. Under some circumstances, an amendment to the MMRSA by the Legislature might arguably violate The Compassionate Use Act of 1996 (adopted by the voters as Proposition 215), which decriminalized the personal use of medical marijuana.39 Under the AUMA, the Legislature may amend Sections 5 (relating to the use of medical marijuana for medical purposes) and 6 (relating to state licensing) and the provisions relating to penalties by majority vote, The Legislature may amend any other provision of the Act by a 2/3 vote. Any amendment must further the purposes and intent of the AUMA. The purpose and intent of the Act include allowing local governments to ban nonmedical marijuana businesses. F. Taxation The AUMA imposes new state taxes on medical and nonmedical marijuana in the following manner: • Effective January 1, 2018, the AUMA imposes an excise tax at the rate of 15% of gross retail sales receipts.40 o This tax will be in addition to existing state and local sales tax.41 Given that state and local sales taxes can range from 7-10%, the combined excise tax + sales tax at the retail level could approach 25%; 35 Health & Saf. Code § 11362.777(g); Mara' v. City of Live Oak (2013) 221 Ca1.App.4th 975, 984; Kirby v. County of Fresno (2015) 242 Ca1.App.4th 940, 969-970. 36 Bus. & Prof. Code § 11362.2(b)(1). 37 Bus. & Prof. Code § 11362.2(b)(4). 38 Bus. & Prof. Code § 11362.2(b)(4). 39 Health & Sal Code § 11362.5. 40 Rev. & Tax Code § 34011(a). 7 117 of 669 • Effective January 1, 2018, the AUMA imposes a separate cultivation tax on all harvested marijuana as follows:42 o $9,25 per dry -weight ounce on all marijuana flowers; o $2.75 per dry -weight ounce on all marijuana leaves; • The AUMA prohibits imposition of state and local sales taxes on medical marijuana.43 • The AUMA exempts marijuana cultivated for personal use from taxation.44 The AUMA does not pre-empt local taxation.45 However, the AUMA's estimated cumulative tax rate of nearly 35% on the purchase of nonmedical marijuana has potentially troubling implications for local governments. A high state tax rate by itself may depress sales and stimulate the black market. Any local taxation of marijuana should be governed by an awareness that a high retail sales tax rate, unposed on an industry that, until recently, has not been regulated at all, might stimulate black market activity and compromise the anticipated yield of revenue. In order to avoid such a result, cities might consider imposing an excise tax on discrete commercial nonmedical marijuana activities rather than on retail sales. New taxes on marijuana require compliance with Proposition 218. 1. Allocation of State Tax Revenues After repaying certain state agencies for marijuana regulatory costs not covered by license fees, and making certain grants to universities for research and development and the Governor's Office of Business and Economic Development, the AUMA distributes the remaining tax revenue as follows: • 60% for youth programs, substance abuse education, prevention and treatment; • 20% for environmental cleanup and remediation; and • 20% for state and local programs that reduce DUI and grant programs designed to reduce negative health impacts resulting from marijuana legalization G. Deliveries Under the MMRSA, medical marijuana deliveries can only be made from a state -licensed dispensary in a city, county, or city and county that does not explicitly prohibit it by local ordinance 46 A delivery person must carry a copy of the dispensary's state -issued license, a government ID, and a copy of the delivery request.47 The patient or caregiver requesting the delivery must also maintain a copy of the delivery request 48 Dispensaries and delivery people who comply with MMRSA are immune from prosecution for marijuana transportation. ° 41 Rev. & Tax Code § 34011(d). 42 Rev. & Tax Code § 34012. 43 Rev. & Tax Code § 34011(g). 44 Rev. & Tax Code § 34012(j). 45 Rev. & Tax Code § 34021. 46 Bus, & Prof. Code § 19340(a). 47 Bus. & Prof. Code §§ 19340(b)(2), 19340(d). 48 Bus. & Prof. Code § 19340(e). 49 Bus. & Prof. Code § 19317(f). 118 of 669 Under the AUMA, deliveries can be made by a state -licensed retailer, microbusiness, or nonprofit unless they are prohibited by local ordinance.50 Although the AUMA does require a customer requesting delivery to maintain a copy of the delivery request, there is no express requirement that delivery people carry or maintain any records.51 Moreover, unlike the MMRSA, the AUMA does not require that deliveries come from a dispensary. Instead, it states that "Deliveries, as defined in this division, may only be made by a licensed retailer or microbusiness, or a licensed nonprofit under Section 26070.5."52 Thus, there is at least some question regarding whether deliveries may be made from non -retail locations by retail employees. Under both the MMRSA and the AUMA, local jurisdictions can ban or regulate deliveries within their borders.53 However, local jurisdictions cannot prevent a delivery service from using public roads to simply pass through its jurisdiction from a licensed dispensary to a delivery location outside of its boundaries.54 III. Local Regulatory Options55 The AUMA preserves the authority of a city to adopt business regulations and land use regulations for nonmedical marijuana activities.56 A. Personal Marijuana Cultivation Under the AUIVIA local governments can regulate or ban all personal, outdoor cultivation, until such time as the Attorney General determines that the use of nonmedical marijuana is lawful in the State of California under federal law. In addition, local governments can "reasonably regulate," but cannot ban, personal, indoor cultivation. Nothing in the AUMA requires a city to enact an ordinance or regulation by a certain date. However, assuming that the AUMA passes, if a city does not have a ban or regulatory scheme governing personal, outdoor cultivation or a regulatory scheme governing personal, indoor cultivation in place before November 9, 2016, a person may legally engage in personal cultivation of up to six marijuana plants at his or her private residence. s° Bus. & Prof. Code §26090(a). 5' Bus. & Prof. Code §26090(b). 53 Bus. & Prof. Code § 26090(a). 53 Bus. & Prof. Code §§ 19340(a), 19316(a), 26200. 54 Bus. & Prof. Code §§ 19340(f), 26080(b), 26090(4 55 For a thorough discussion of the various marijuana regulatory options that a city may consider, see McEwen, Medical Marijuana -Revisited After New State Laws (Spring 2016) <http:J/www.cacities.orglResources- DocumentslMember-Engagement/Professional-Departments/City-Attorneys/Library/2016/Spring-2016/5 -2 016- Spring-Medical-Marijuana-%E2%80%93-Revisited-After>. In addition, sample ordinances may be found on the League's website, at: http://www.cacities.org/Policy-Advocacy/Hot-Issues/Medical-Marijuana. But note: the regulatory schemes discussed in the McEwen paper and posted on the League's website pertain to medical marijuana businesses under the MMRSA and may need to be modified to comply with the requirements of the AUMA. 56 Health & Saf. Code § 11362.2; Bus. & Prof. Code §§ 26201, 26200(a). 7 119 of 669 B. Nonmedical Marijuana Businesses The AUMA recognizes a range of businesses, including dispensaries, cultivators, manufacturers, distributors, transporters, and testing laboratories. Cities may expressly ban, adopt business regulations, or adopt land use regulations pertaining to any or all of these businesses. Again, the AUMA does not require a city to enact a regulatory scheme or ban by a certain date. However, assuming that the AUMA passes in November, if a city wishes to regulate or ban marijuana businesses before marijuana businesses may legally operate within the city, the regulations or ban will need to take effect before the state begins issuing nonmedical marijuana business licenses. The League anticipates that cities have until January 1, 2018 to enact bans or regulations relating to nonmedical marijuana businesses, because: (1) nonmedical marijuana businesses cannot operate in any city without a state license;57 (2) the state licensing agencies in charge of implementing the AUMA have stated that they anticipate that they will not begin issuing licenses under the MMRSA until January 2018, and it is unlikely that said agencies will be able to begin issuing licenses under the AUMA before they begin issuing licenses under the MMRSA; and (3) the AUMA does not require state agencies to issue licenses until January 1, 2018.55 It is not the League's position that state licensing agencies cannot issue licenses before January 1, 2018, just that it is unlikely that they will do so. C. Caution Against Use of Permissive Zoning Under a permissive zoning code, any use not enumerated in the code is presumptively prohibited, unless an authorized city official finds that the proposed use is substantially the same in character and intensity as those land uses listed in the code.59 Although the MMRSA upheld a city's authority to rely on permissive zoning to prohibit medical marijuana land uses, it is unlikely that cities will succeed in arguing that nonmedical marijuana land uses are prohibited by permissive zoning under the AUMA. This is so because: (1) the statutory language in the AUMA regarding local control seems to anticipate that a city will adopt an ordinance explicitly prohibiting and/or regulating nonmedical marijuana businesses (rather than relying on the silence of its Code to argue for a prohibited use);6° (2) the AUMA does not contain the same protective language as the 57 Bus. & Prof. Code § 26038. 58 Bus. & Prof. Code § 26012 (c). 59 See City of Corona v. Naulls (2008) 166 Ca1.App.4th 418, 433-436. See also County of Los Angeles v. Hill (2011) 192 Cal.App.4th 861, 871 [holding that "medical marijuana dispensaries and pharmacies are not `similarly situated' for public health and safety purposes"]; City of Monterey v. Carrnshimba (2013) 215 Ca1.App.4th 1068, 1091 [holding that a medical marijuana dispensary was not substantially similar to the listed commercial use classifications for personal services, retail sales, pharmacies and medical supplies]; County of Tulare v. Nunes • (2013) 215 Ca1.App.4th 1188, 1205 [holding that a medical marijuana collective did not qualify as an "agricultural" land use because "marijuana is a controlled substance and is not treated as a mere crop or horticultural product under the law"]. G0 Bus, & Prof Code § 26200 ["Nothing in this division shall be interpreted to supersede or limit the authority of a local jurisdiction to adopt and enforce local ordinances to regulate businesses licensed under this division, including, but not limited to, local zoning and land use requirements, business license requirements, and requirements related 8 120 of 669 MMRSA with respect to permissive zoning;61 and (3) the AUMA explicitly designates nonmedical marijuana as an agricultural product —thus if a city's permissive zoning code authorizes agricultural uses, the city may be precluded from arguing that marijuana is prohibited.62 Therefore, cities that wish to ban all or some nonmedical marijuana activities should adopt express prohibitions, even if they operate under a permissive zoning code. IV. What actions need to be taken? At this time city officials should: (1) review the city's municipal code; (2) consider whether they wish to regulate the personal cultivation of nonmedical marijuana indoors; (3) consider whether they wish to regulate or ban the personal cultivation of nonmedical marijuana outdoors; (4) consider whether they wish to enact business regulations of nonmedical marijuana businesses; (5) consider whether they wish to enact land use regulations of nonmedical marijuana businesses; (6) consider whether they wish to enact local taxes on marijuana; and (7) comply with Proposition 218 if they decide to enact local taxes on marijuana. Cities should prioritize considering or enacting ordinances regulating personal nonmedical marijuana cultivation, because it will be legal under state law on November 9, 2016 if the AUMA passes, whereas nonmedical marijuana businesses will not be able to operate lawfully until the state licensing system becomes operational (likely in late 2017). Although cultivation for personal use will be legal as of November 9, 2016 if the AUMA is approved by voters, local governments will not lose any regulatory authority if they do not have an ordinance in place addressing personal cultivation before the election. Locals will retain the ability to regulate personal cultivation and to enact related ordinances at any time after the election. The only change the AUMA will make in this area is to prohibit local bans of indoor cultivation for personal use. No ordinance enacted prior to the election can prevent this change in the law. to reducing exposure to second hand smoke, or to completely prohibit the establishment or operation of one or more types of businesses licensed under this division within the local jurisdiction."] (emphasis added). 61 Compare Health & Saf. Code § 11362.777(b)(3) [a "person or entity shall not submit an application for a state license . , . if the proposed cultivation of marijuana will violate the provisions of any local ordinance or regulation, or if medical marijuana is prohibited by the city, county, or city and county in which the cultivation is proposed to occur, either expressly or otherwise under principles of permissive zoning"] with Bus. & Prof Code § 26205(e) ["Licensing authorities shall not approve an application for a state license under this division if approval of the state license will violate the provisions of any local ordinance or regulation adopted in accordance with Section 26200."]. 62 Bus. & Prof. Code § 26067(a). 9 121 of 669 ADULT USE OF MARIJUANA ACT (AUMA) PROVISIONS DIRECTLY AFFECTING CITY AUTHORITY PERSONAL USE NON -MEDICAL and MEDICAL Possession of no more than 28.5 grams of marijuana or 8 grams of marijuana products Cities cannot prohibit or regulate' Cultivation of 6 plants Cities can prohibit OUTDOOR cultivation; Cannot prohibit INDOOR cultivation but can reasonably regulate2 No Smoking Where smoking tobacco prohibited; within 1,000 feet of school, day care center, or youth center; driving automobile or boat; possess on school grounds, day care center, youth center3 City Facilities May prohibit possession and smoking in building owned, leased, or occupied by city4 City as Employer May maintain a drug and alcohol free workplace and not required to permit or accommodate the use, consumption, possession, transfer, transportation, sale, display, or growth of marijuana in the workplaces BUSINESS (COMMERCIAL CANNABIS) REGULATIONSS NON -MEDICAL MEDICAL Local Land Use Regulation May prohibit or regulate variety of land uses7 May prohibit or regulate variety of land uses (see fn. 6) Local Bans/Regulation/Licensing May prohibit or regulate activities licensed by state (see fn. 6) May prohibit or regulate activities licensed by state (see fn. 6)8 Person can't submit application for state license unless has received license, permit, or authorization from local government9 Local Regulation of Delivery May prohibit or regulate but can't prohibit use of city streets10 Must explicitly prohibit11 Local Environmental; Health; Safety; Testing; Security Cities may adopt stricter standards than state minimum standards'2 TAXATION'S NON -MEDICAL MEDICAL State !Local: Sales Tax YES NO14 Other Local Taxes15 YES YES State excise tax (15%) on purchasers; shared with public safety agencies. YES YES May 23, 2016 122 of 669 State cultivation tax ($9.25 per dry - weight ounce of flowers; $2.75 per dry -weight ounce of leaves); shared with public safety agencies. YES YES 1 H&S 11362.1(a) 2 H&S 11362.2(b). AUMA requires marijuana produced by plants in excess of 28.5 grams to be kept within private residence in a locked space that is not visible from a public place. H&S 11362.3. Smoking of marijuana is prohibited in all of these locations, 4 H&S 11362.45(g) H&S 11362.45(f) 6 The AUMA establishes a licensing scheme for nonmedical marijuana businesses (B&P 26000 and following). Existing law (B&P §19320 and following) establish a licensing scheme for medical marijuana businesses. Businesses covered are delivery, transportation, manufacture, cultivation, retailer, distributor and testing service. 7 B&P 26200 EXCEPTION: Cities must explicitly prohibit delivery (B&P 19340(b)(1)) 9 B&P 19322 10 EXCEPTION: Cities may not prohibit use of public streets for delivery (H&S 26090(c)) '1 B&P 19340(b)(1) 12 B&P 19316; 26201. 13 The AUMA imposes an excise tax on the purchase of marijuana and a cultivation tax on the cultivation of marijuana. 14 R&T 34011(d) 15 R&T 34021 May 23, 2016 123 of 669 THE LEGALIZATION OF MARIJUANA IN COLORADO THE IMPACT 11'J i u b (521 124 of 669 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 3/September 2015 PREPARED BY: INTELLIGENCE ANALYST KEVIN WONG INTELLIGENCE ANALYST CHELSEY CLARKE 125 of 669 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 3.1September 2015 Acknowledgements Thank you to all who provided case examples and information for the "related materials" sections of this report. Also, thanks to all the agencies that were so cooperative in providing data used in this report; specifically: • El Paso Intelligence Center • National Highway Traffic Safety Administration • National Center for Natural Products Research • Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration • United States Custom and Border Protection • United States Postal Inspection Service • Colorado Bureau of Investigation • Colorado Department of Education • Colorado Department of Human Services, Office of Behavioral Health • Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment • Colorado Department of Transportation • Colorado Office of State Planning and Budgeting • Colorado State Patrol • Colorado Violent Death Reporting System • Colorado Department of Revenue • Marijuana Enforcement Division • Rocky Mountain Poison and Drug Center • State of Colorado Judicial Branch, Division of Probation Services • University of Colorado Hospital - Burn Trauma Unit • Aurora Police Department • Boulder Police Department • City and County of Denver • Denver Epidemiology Working Group • Denver Police Department • Lorimer County Sheriff's Office • Arapahoe House Public Communications Office • ChemaTox Laboratory • Colorado Association of School Resource Officers • Colorado Children's Hospital • Colorado Hospital Association • Colorado School Counselors Association • McDonalds Corporate Office • Starbucks Coffee Company Corporate Office • The Salvation Army Acknowledgements 126 of 669 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 3/September 2015 THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK 127 of 669 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 3/September 2015 Table of Contents Acknowledgements Executive Summary 1 Introduction 7 Purpose 7 The Debate 7 Background g Preface g Colorado's History with Marijuana Legalization 9 Early Medical Marijuana 2000-2008 9 Medical Marijuana Commercialization and Expansion 2009-Present 9 Recreational Marijuana 2013-Present 11 SECTION 1: Impaired Driving 13 Introduction 13 Definitions 13 Some Findings 14 Data for Traffic Deaths 15 Total Number of Statewide Traffic Deaths 16 Marijuana -Related Traffic Deaths 16 Average Number of Traffic Deaths Related to Marijuana 17 Traffic Deaths Related to Marijuana 17 Percent of All Traffic Deaths That Were Marijuana Related 18 Operators Testing Positive for Marijuana 18 Average Number of Operators Testing Positive for Marijuana 19 Percent of Operators Tested Who Were Positive for Marijuana 19 Drug Combinations for Operators Testing Positive for Marijuana 20 Data for Impaired Driving 20 Trends in Cannabinoid Screens & THC Confirmations in Colorado 2009-2014 21 Number of Cannabinoid Screens 22 Number of Positive Cannabinoid Screens 22 Number of Positive Cannabinoid Screens with Active THC 23 Colorado State Patrol Number of DUIDs, 2014 24 Denver Police Department Number of DUIDs Involving Marijuana 25 Aurora Police Department Number of DUIDs, 2014 25 Table of Contents 128 of 669 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 3/September 2015 Larimer County Sheriff's Office Percent of DUIDs Involving Marijuana 26 Number of DUI Admissions to Arapahoe House with Marijuana as a Self -Reported Drug of Choice 26 Total Number of Accidents in Colorado 27 Related Costs 27 Drug Recognition Experts 28 Case Examples and Related Material 28 Sources 32 SECTION 2: Youth Marijuana Use 35 Introduction 35 Some Findings 35 Data 37 Colorado Average Past Month Use of Marijuana Ages 12 to 17 Years Old 37 Youth (Ages 12 to 17 Years Old) Past Month Marijuana Use National vs. Colorado 37 Prevalence of Past 30-Day Marijuana. Use, 12 to 17 Years Old, 2006-2012 (U.S., Denver Metro and Colorado) 38 National Average Past Month Use by 12 to 17 Years Old, 2013 38 State by State Past Month Usage by 12 to 17 Years Old, 2013 39 Top and Bottom States for Past Month Marijuana Use Youth (12 to 17 Years Old), 2013 40 Drug -Related Suspensions/Expulsions 40 Average Drug -Related Suspensions/Expulsions 41 Percentage of Total Suspensions in Colorado from 2004-2014 School Years 42 Percentage of Total Expulsions in Colorado from 2004-2014 School Years 42 Percentage of Total Referrals to Law Enforcement in Colorado from 2004-2014 School Years 43 Colorado Probation Average Percent Positive THC Urinalyses Ages 12 to 17 Years Old 43 Colorado School Resource Officer Survey 44 Predominant Marijuana Violations, 2015 44 Student Marijuana Source, 2015 45 Some Comments from School Resource Officers 45 School Counselor Survey 46 Predominant Marijuana Violations, 2015 47 Student Marijuana Source, 2015 48 Some Comments from School Counselors 48 Youth Use Surveys Not Utilized and Why 52 Youth Risk Behavior Survey (YRBS) 52 Monitoring the Future (MTF) Study 52 Healthy Kids Colorado Survey (HKCS) 53 Related Material 53 Table of Contents 129 of 669 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 3/September 2015 Sources 58 SECTION 3: Adult Marijuana Use 61 Introduction 61 Some Findings 62 Data ... _ 63 College Age (18 to 25 Years Old) 63 Average Past Month Use of Marijuana College Age 63 College Age Past Month Marijuana Use (National vs. Colorado) 64 Prevalence of Past 30-Day Marijuana Use 2006-2012 (United States, Denver Metro and Colorado) 64 States for Past Month Marijuana Use College -Age, 2013 65 State of Colorado Probation Number of Positive THC Urinalyses 65 Adults (26+ Years Old) 66 Average Past Month Use of Marijuana 66 Adult Past Month Marijuana Use (National vs. Colorado) 66 Prevalence of Past 30-Day Marijuana Use, 2006-2012, (United States, Denver Metro and Colorado) 67 States for Past Month Marijuana Use Adults, 2013 67 State of Colorado Probation Number of Positive THC Urinalyses 68 Colorado Adult Marijuana Use Demographics 68 Related Material 69 Sources 72 SECTION 4: Emergency Room and Hospital Marijuana -Related Admissions 75 Introduction 75 Some Findings 75 Definitions 77 Data 77 Marijuana -Related Emergency Room Visits 77 Colorado Emergency Department Rates that are Likely Related to Marijuana 78 Colorado Emergency Department Rates that Could be Related to Marijuana 79 Emergency Department Rates Per 100,000 Marijuana -Related, 2011-2013, Colorado and Deriver 80 Hospitalizations Related to Marijuana 81 Average Marijuana -Related Hospitalizations 81 Colorado Hospitalization Rates that are Likely Related to Marijuana 82 Colorado Hospitalization Rates that Could be Related to Marijuana 83 Hospital Discharge Rates Per 100,000 Marijuana Related, 2007-2013, Colorado and Denver 84 Table of Contents 130 of 669 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact 'Vol. 3/September 2015 Marijuana Ingestion Among Children Under 12 Years -of -Age 85 Cost 85 Related Material S5 Sources 87 SECTION 5: Marijuana -Related Exposure 89 Introduction 89 Some Findings 89 Data 91 All Ages, Average Number of Marijuana -Related Exposures 91 Number of Exposures Reported for Marijuana Only 91 Number of Marijuana -Related Exposures, by Age Range 92 Youth Ages 6 to 17 Years Old, Average Number of Marijuana -Related Exposures 92 Children Ages 0 to 5 Years Old, Average Number of Marijuana -Related Exposures 93 Marijuana -Related Exposures Children Ages 0 to 5 Years Old 93 Average Percent of All Marijuana -Related Exposures, Ages 0 to 5 Years Old, National vs. Colorado 94 Related Material 94 Sources 95 SECTION 6: Treatment 97 Introduction 97 Some Findings 97 Data 98 Treatment with Marijuana as Primary Substance of Abuse, All Ages 98 Drug Type for Treatment Admissions, All Ages 99 Percent of Marijuana Treatment Admissions by Age Group 99 Marijuana Treatment Admissions Based on Criminal Justice Referrals 100 Sources 100 SECTION 7: Diversion of Colorado Marijuana 101 Introduction 101 Definitions 102 Some Findings 102 Data 103 Colorado Marijuana Interdiction Seizures 103 Average Pounds of Colorado Marijuana from Interdiction Seizures 104 States to Which Colorado Marijuana Was Destined (2014) 105 Top Three Cities for Marijuana Origin 105 A Few Examples of Interdictions 105 Table of Contents iv 131 of 669 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 3/September 2015 A Few Examples of Investigations 111 A Few Examples of Diversion Involving Youth 116 Some Examples from School Resource Officers 117 Some Examples from School Counselors 118 Comments 118 Sources 119 SECTION 8: Diversion by Parcel 123 Introduction 123 Some Findings 123 Data 124 Parcels Containing Marijuana Mailed from Colorado to Another State 124 Pounds of Colorado Marijuana Seized by the U.S. Postal Inspection Service 125 Number of States Destined to Receive Marijuana Mailed from Colorado 125 A Few Parcel Examples 127 Sources 130 SECTION 9: THC Extraction Labs 133 Introduction 133 Some Findings 134 Data 134 THC Extraction Lab Explosions 134 THC Extraction Lab Explosion Injuries 135 University of Colorado Hospital THC Extraction Lab Self -Admitted Burn Victims 135 Sources 136 SECTION 10: Related Data 137 Topics 137 Crime 137 Colorado Crime 138 All Reported Crime in Denver 138 City and County of Denver Crime 139 Total Marijuana -Related Crime for Denver City and County 139 Marijuana -Related Crime for Denver City and County (Industry and Non -Industry) 140 Denver Police Department Unlawful Public Display/Consumption of Marijuana 141 Boulder Police Department Marijuana Public Consumption Citations 141 Revenue 142 Total Revenue from Marijuana Taxes, Calendar Year 2014 142 Colorado's Total General Fund Revenue, FY 2015 143 Table of Contents 132 of 669 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol, 3/September 2015 Some Costs Related to Marijuana Revenue for the State of Colorado, FY 2015/16 144 Articles 144 Homeless 146 Total Overnight Beds Provided, January Through June 146 Related Material 146 Suicide Data 148 Average Toxicology of Suicides Among Adolescents Ages 10 to 19 Years Old, 2009-2013 149 Average Toxicology Results by Age Group Colorado, 2009-2013 149 Environmental Impact 149 THC Potency 151 Potency Monitoring Program — Average THC Percent DEA-Submitted Cannabis Samples 1995-2013 (National) 151 Potency Monitoring Program — Average THC Percent All Submitted Hash Oil Samples 1995-2013 (National) 152 Marijuana Use and Alcohol Consumption 153 Colorado Average Consumption of Alcohol in Gallons, Per Calendar Year 153 Medical Marijuana Registry 153 Medical Marijuana Registry Identification Cards 153 Profile of Colorado Medical Marijuana Cardholders 154 Percent of Medical Marijuana Patients Based on Reporting Condition 154 Colorado Licensed Marijuana Businesses as of January 2015 154 Business Comparisons, January 2015 155 Colorado Business Comparisons, January 2015 155 Denver Business Comparisons, January 2015 156 Demand and Market Size 156 2014 Reported Sales of Marijuana in Colorado 157 2014 Price of Marijuana 157 Local Response to the Medical and Recreational Marijuana Industry in Colorado 158 Polling 158 Lawsuits 159 Other Issues 160 Sources 161 SECTION 11: Reference Material 165 Reports 165 Articles 167 Table of Contents vi 133 of 669 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 3/September 2015 Executive Summary Purpose Rocky Mountain High Intensity Drug Trafficking Area (RMHIDTA) is tracking the impact of marijuana legalization in the state of Colorado. This report will utilize, whenever possible, a comparison of three different eras in Colorado's legalization history: • 2006 - 2008: Early medical marijuana era • 2009 - Present: Medical marijuana commercialization and expansion era • 2013 - Present: Recreational marijuana era Rocky Mountain HIDTA will collect and report comparative data in a variety of areas, including but not limited to: • Impaired driving • Youth marijuana use • Adult marijuana use • Emergency room admissions • Marijuana -related exposure cases • Diversion of Colorado marijuana This is the third annual report on the impact of legalized marijuana in Colorado. It is divided into eleven sections, each providing information on the impact of marijuana legalization. The sections are as follows: Section 1- Impaired Driving: • In 2014, when retail marijuana businesses began operating, there was a 32 percent increase in marijuana -related traffic deaths in just one year from 2013. • Colorado marijuana -related traffic deaths increased 92 percent from 2010 - 2014. During the same time period all traffic deaths only increased 8 percent. Executive Summary Page 1 1 134 of 669 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 3/September 2015 • Marijuana -related traffic deaths were approximately 20 percent of all traffic deaths in 2014 compared to half that (10 percent) just five years ago. • In 2014, when retail marijuana businesses began operating, toxicology reports with positive marijuana results of active THC results for primarily driving under the influence have increased 45 percent in just one year. Section 2 - Youth Marijuana Use: • In 2013,11.16 percent of Colorado youth ages 12 to 17 years old were considered current marijuana users compared to 7.15 percent nationally. Colorado ranked 3rd in the nation and was 56 percent higher than the national average. • Drug -related suspensions/expulsions increased 40 percent from school years 2008/2009 to 2013/2014. The vast majority were for marijuana violations. • Positive THC urinalyses tests, for probationers ages 12 to 17 years old, increased 20 percent since marijuana was legalized in 2013. • A 2015 survey of school resource officers and school counselors revealed similar results about increased school marijuana issues since the legalization of recreational marijuana. Section 3 - Adult Marijuana Use: • In 2013, 29 percent of college age students (ages 18 to 25 years old) were considered current marijuana users compared to 18.91 percent nationally. Colorado, ranked 2nd in the nation, was 54 percent higher than the national average. • In 2013,10.13 percent of adults ages 26 years old and over were considered current marijuana users compared to 5.45 percent nationally. Colorado, ranked 5th in the nation, was 86 percent higher than the national average. • Positive THC urinalyses tests, for probationers age 18 to 25 and 26+ years old, increased 49 and 87 percent respectively since marijuana was legalized in 2013. Executive Summary Page 12 135 of 669 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 3/September 2015 Section 4 - Emergency Room Marijuana and Hospital Marijuana -Related Admissions: • In 2014, when retail marijuana businesses began operating, there was a 29 percent increase in the number of marijuana -related emergency room visits in only one year. • In 2014, when retail marijuana businesses began operating, there was a 38 percent increase in the number of marijuana -related hospitalizations in only one year. • In the three years after medical marijuana was commercialized, compared to the three years prior, there was a 46 percent increase in hospitalizations related to marijuana. • Children's Hospital Colorado reported 2 marijuana ingestions among children under 12 in 2009 compared to 16 in 2014. Section 5 - Marijuana -Related Exposure: • In 2014, when retail marijuana businesses began operating, marijuana -only related exposures increased 72 percent in only one year. • In the years medical marijuana was commercialized (2009 - 2012), marijuana - related exposures averaged a 42 percent increase from pre -commercialization years (2006 - 2008) average. • During the years 2013 - 2014, the average number of all age exposures was 175 per year. Exposures have doubled since marijuana was legalized in Colorado. • Young children (ages 0 to 5) marijuana -related exposures in Colorado: o During the years 2013 - 2014, the average number of children exposed was 31 per year. ■ This is a 138 percent increase from the medical marijuana commercialization years (2009 - 2012) average which was a 225 percent increase from pre -commercialization years (2006 - 2008). Executive Summary Page ! 3 136 of 669 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 3/September 2015 Section 6 - Treatment: • Over the last ten years, the top three drugs involved in treatment admissions, in descending order, were alcohol (average 12,943), marijuana (average 6,491) and methamphetamine (average 5,044). • Marijuana treatment data from Colorado in years 2005 - 2014 does not appear to demonstrate a definite trend. Colorado averages approximately 6,500 treatment admissions annual for marijuana abuse. Section 7 - Diversion of Colorado Marijuana: • During 2009 - 2012, when medical marijuana was commercialized, the yearly average number interdiction seizures of Colorado marijuana increased 365 percent from 52 to 242 per year. • During 2013 - 2014, when recreational marijuana was legalized, the yearly average interdiction seizures of Colorado marijuana increased another 34 percent from 242 to 324. • The average pounds of Colorado marijuana seized, destined for 36 other states, increased 33 percent from 2005 - 2008 compared to 2009 - 2014. Section 8 - Diversion by Parcel: • U.S. mail parcel interceptions of Colorado marijuana, destined for 38 other states, increased 2,033 percent from 2010 - 2014. • Pounds of Colorado marijuana seized in the U.S. mail, destined for 38 other states, increased 722 percent from 2010 - 2014. • From 2006 - 2008, compared to 2013 - 2014, the average number of seized parcels containing Colorado marijuana, that were destined outside the United States, increased over 7,750 percent and pounds of marijuana seized in those parcels increased over 1,079 percent. Executive Summary Page 14 137 of 669 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 3/September 2015 Section 9 - THC Extraction Labs: • In 2013, there were 12 THC extraction lab explosions compared to 32 in 2014. • In 2013, there were 18 injuries from THC extraction lab explosions compared to 30in2014. Section 10 - Related Data: • Overall, crime in Denver increased 12.3 percent from 2012 to 2014. • Colorado annual tax revenue from the sale of recreational marijuana was 52.5 million (CY2014) or about 0.7 percent of total general fund revenue (FY2015). • The majority of cities and counties in Colorado have banned recreational marijuana businesses. • National THC potency has risen from an average of 3.96 percent in 1995 to an average of 12.55 percent in 2013. The average potency in Colorado was 17.1 p ercent. • Homelessness increased with the appeal of legal marijuana being a factor. • Denver has more licensed medical marijuana centers (198) than pharmacies (117). Section 11- Related Material: • This section Lists various studies and reports. There is much more data in each of the eleven sections, which can be used as a standalone document. All of the sections are on the Rocky Mountain HIDTA website and can be printed individually; go to www.rmhidta.org/Reports. Executive Summary Page 15 138 of 669 1 LV The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 3/September 2015 THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK Page 16 139 of 669 1 L J The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol, 3/September 2015 Introductjon Purpose The purpose of this report and future reports is to document the impact of the legalization of marijuana for medical and recreational use in Colorado. Colorado and Washington serve as experimental labs for the nation to determine the impact of legalizing marijuana. This is an important opportunity to gather and examine meaningful data and facts. Citizens and policymakers may want to delay any decisions on this important issue until there is sufficient and accurate data to make an informed decision. The Debate There is an ongoing debate in this country concerning the impact of legalizing marijuana. Those in favor argue that the benefits of removing prohibition far outweigh the potential negative consequences. Some of the benefits they cite include: • Eliminate arrests for possession and sale, resulting in fewer people with criminal records and a reduction in the prison population. • Free up law enforcement resources to target more serious and violent criminals. • Reduce traffic fatalities since users will switch from alcohol to marijuana, which does not impair driving to the same degree. • No increase in use, even among youth, because of tight regulations. • Added revenue generated through taxation. • Eliminate the black market. Those opposed to legalizing marijuana argue that the potential benefits of lifting prohibition pale in comparison to the adverse consequences. Some of the consequences they cite include: • Increase in marijuana use among youth and young adults. • Increase in marijuana -impaired driving fatalities. • Rise in number of marijuana -addicted users in treatment. Introduction Page 17 140 of 669 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 3/September 2015 • Diversion of marijuana. • Adverse impact and cost of the physical and mental health damage caused by marijuana use. • The economic cost to society will far outweigh any potential revenue generated. Background The next several years should help determine which side is most accurate. A number of states have enacted varying degrees of legalized marijuana by permitting medical marijuana and four permitting recreational marijuana. In 2010, Colorado's legislature passed legislation that included the licensing of medical marijuana centers ("dispensaries"), cultivation operations and manufacturing of marijuana edibles for medical purposes. In November 2012, Colorado voters legalized recreational marijuana allowing individuals to use and possess an ounce of marijuana and grow up to six plants. The amendment also permits licensing marijuana retail stores, cultivation operations, marijuana edible factories and testing facilities. Washington voters passed a similar measure in 2012. Preface Volume 3 2015 will be formatted similar to Volume 2. It is important to note that, for purposes of the debate on legalizing marijuana in Colorado, there are three distinct timeframes to consider. Those are: the early medical marijuana era (2000 - 2008), the medical marijuana commercialization era (2009 - current) and the recreational marijuana era (2013 - current). • 2000-2008: In November 2000, Colorado voters passed Amendment 20 which permitted a qualifying patient, and/or caregiver of a patient, to possess up to 2 ounces of marijuana and grow 6 marijuana plants for medical purposes. During that time there were between 1,000 and 4,800 medical marijuana cardholders and no known dispensaries operating in the state. • 2009-Current: Beginning in 2009 due to a number of events, marijuana became de facto legalized through the commercialization of the medical marijuana industry. By the end of 2012, there were over 100,000 medical marijuana cardholders and 500 licensed dispensaries operating in Colorado. There were also licensed cultivation operations and edible manufacturers. Introduction Page 18 141 of 669 I '"3 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 3/September 2015 • 2013 - Current: In November 2012, Colorado voters passed Constitutional Amendment 64 which legalized marijuana for recreational purposes for anyone over the age of 21. The amendment also allowed for licensed marijuana retail stores, cultivation operations and edible manufacturers. Retail marijuana businesses became operational January 1, 2014. Colorado's History with Marijuana Legalization Early Medical Marijuana 2000 - 2008 In November 2000, Colorado voters passed Amendment 20 which permitted a qualifying patient and/or caregiver of a patient to possess up to 2 ounces of marijuana and grow 6 marijuana plants for medical purposes. Amendment 20 provided identification cards for individuals with a doctor's recommendation to use marijuana for a debilitating medical condition. The system was managed by the Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment (CDPHE), which issued identification cards to patients based on a doctor's recommendation. The department began accepting applications from patients in June 2001. From 2001- 2008, there were only 5,993 patient applications received and only 55 percent of those designated a primary caregiver. During that time, the average was three patients per caregiver and there were no known retail stores selling medical marijuana ("dispensaries"). Dispensaries were not an issue because CDPHE regulations limited a caregiver to no more than five patients. Medical Marijuana Commercialization and Expansion 2009 - Present In 2009, the dynamics surrounding medical marijuana in Colorado changed substantially. There were a number of factors that played a role in the explosion of the medical marijuana industry and number of patients: The first was a Denver District Judge who, in late 2007, ruled that CDPHE violated the state's open meeting requirement when setting a five -patient -to -one -caregiver ratio and overturned the rule. That opened the door for caregivers to claim an unlimited number of patients for whom they were providing and growing marijuana. Although this decision expanded the parameters, very few initially began operating medical Introduction Page 19 142 of 669 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 3fSeptember 2015 marijuana commercial operations (dispensaries) in fear of prosecution, particularly from the federal government. The judge's ruling, and caregivers expanding their patient base, created significant problems for local prosecutors seeking a conviction for marijuana distribution by caregivers. Many jurisdictions ceased or limited filing those types of cases. At a press conference in Santa Ana, California on February 25, 2009, the U.S. Attorney General was asked whether raids in California on medical marijuana dispensaries would continue. He responded "No" and referenced the President's campaign promise related to medical marijuana. In mid -March 2009, the U.S. Attorney General clarified the position saying that the Department of Justice enforcement policy would be restricted to traffickers who falsely masqueraded as medical dispensaries and used medical marijuana laws as a shield. Beginning in the spring of 2009, Colorado experienced an explosion to over 20,000 new medical marijuana patient applications and the emergence of over 250 medical marijuana dispensaries (allowed to operate as "caregivers"). One dispensary owner claimed to be a primary caregiver to 1,200 patients. Government took little or no action against these commercial operations. In July 2009, the Colorado Board of Health, after hearings, failed to reinstate the five - patients -to -one -caregiver rule. On October 19, 2009, U.S. Deputy Attorney General David Ogden provided guidelines for U.S. Attorneys in states that enacted medical marijuana laws. The memo advised "Not focus federal resources in your state on individuals whose actions are in clear and unambiguous compliance with existing state law providing for the medical use of marijuana." By the end of 2009, new patient applications jumped from around 6,000 for the first seven years to an additional 38,000 in just one year. Actual cardholders went from 4,800 in 2008 to 41,000 in 2009. By mid-2010, there were over 900 unlicensed marijuana dispensaries identified by law enforcement. In 2010, law enforcement sought legislation to ban dispensaries and reinstate the one -to -five ratio of caregiver to patient as the model. However, in 2010 the Colorado Legislature passed HB-1284 which legalized medical marijuana centers (dispensaries), marijuana cultivation operations, and manufacturers for marijuana edible products. By Introduction Page 10 143 of 669 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 3/September 2015 2012, there were 532 licensed dispensaries in Colorado and over 108,000 registered patients, 94 percent of who qualified for a card because of severe pain. Recreational Marijuana 2013 - Present In November of 2012, Colorado voters passed Amendment 64, which legalized marijuana for recreational use. Amendment 64 allows individuals 21 years or older to grow up to six plants, possess/use 1 ounce or less and furnish an ounce or less of marijuana if not for remuneration. Amendment 64 permits marijuana retail stores, marijuana cultivation sites, marijuana edible factories and marijuana testing sites. The first retail marijuana businesses were licensed and operational in January of 2014. Some individuals have established private cannabis clubs, formed co-ops for large marijuana grow operations, and/or supplied marijuana for no fee other than donations. What has been the impact of commercialized medical marijuana and legalized recreational marijuana on Colorado? Review the report and you decide. NOTE: • DATA, IF AVAILABLE, WILL COMPARE PRE- AND POST-2009 WHEN MEDICAL MARIJUANA BECAME COMMERCIALIZED AND AFTER 2013 WHEN RECREATIONAL MARIJUANA BECAME LEGALIZED. • MULTI -FEAR COMPARISONS ARE GENERALLY BETTER INDICATORS OF TREN DS. ONE-YEAR FLUCI`UATIONS DO NOT NECESSARILY REFLECT A NEW TREND. • PERCENTAGE COMPARISONS MAY BE ROUNDED ro THE NEAREST WHOLE NUMBER • PERCENT CHANGES ADDED TO GRAPHS WERE CALCULATED AND ADDED BY ROCKY MOUNTAIN HIDTA. • THIS REPORT WILL CITE DATASEI S WITH TERMS SUCH AS "MARIJUANA -RELATED" OR "TESTED POSITIVE FOR MARIJUANA." THAT DOES NOT NECESSARILY PROVE THAT MARIJUANA WAS THE CAUSE OF THE INCIDENT. Introduction Page 111 144 of 669 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 3/September 2015 THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK Page 112 145 of 669 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 3/September 2015 SECTION 1: Impaired Driving Introduction This section provides information on traffic deaths and impaired driving involving positive tests for marijuana. The data comparison, when available, will be from 2006 through 2014. The information compares the early medical marijuana era (2006 - 2008), the medical marijuana commercialization and expansion era (2009 - current) and the recreational marijuana era (2013 - current) in Colorado. • 2006 - 2008: There were between 1,000 and 4,800 medical marijuana cardholders and no known dispensaries operating in Colorado. • 2009 - Current: There were over 108,000 medical marijuana cardholders and 532 licensed dispensaries operating in Colorado by the end of 2012. See the introduction at the beginning of this report for more details on the commercialization and explosion of Colorado's medical marijuana trade. • 2013 to- Current: In November 2012, Colorado voters passed Constitutional Amendment 64 which Legalized marijuana for recreational purposes for anyone over 21 years of age. The amendment also allowed for licensed marijuana retail stores, cultivation operations and edibles manufacturing. Definitions DUID: Driving Under the Influence of Drugs (DUID) which can include alcohol in combination with drugs. This is an important measurement since the driver's ability to operate a vehicle was sufficiently impaired that it brought his or her driving to the attention of law enforcement. Not only the erratic driving but the subsequent evidence that the subject was under the influence of marijuana confirms the causation factor. SECTION 1: Impaired Driving Page 113 146 of 669 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 3/September 2015 Definitions in Reviewing Fatality Data: • Marijuana -Related: Also called "marijuana mentions/' is any time marijuana shows up in the toxicology report. It could be marijuana only or marijuana with other drugs and/or alcohol. • Marijuana Only: When toxicology results show marijuana and no other drugs or alcohol. • Fatalities: A death resulting from a traffic crash involving a motor vehicle. • Operators: Anyone in control of their own movements such as a driver, pedestrian or bicyclist. Some Findings • In 2014, when retail marijuana stores began operating, there was a 32 percent increase in marijuana -related traffic deaths in just one year. • Colorado marijuana -related traffic deaths increased 92 percent from 2010 - 2014. During the same time periods all traffic deaths only increased 8 percent respectively. • In 2009, Colorado marijuana -related traffic deaths involving operators testing positive for marijuana represented 10 percent of all traffic fatalities. By 2014, that number nearly doubled to 19.26 percent. • The average number of marijuana -related traffic deaths increased 41 percent in the two years recreational marijuana was legalized (2013 - 2014) compared to the medical marijuana commercialization years (2009 - 2012), which was 48 percent higher than pre -commercialization years (2006 - 2008). • Consistent with the past, in 2014 still only 47 percent of operators involved in traffic deaths were tested for drug impairment. Out of those who were tested, about 1 in 4 tested positive for marijuana. • The Colorado State Patrol DUID Program, started in 2014, indicated: o 77 percent (674) of the 874 DUIDs involved marijuana SECTION 1: Impaired Driving Page 114 147 of 669 1 VJ The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 3/September 2015 o 41 percent (354) of the 874 DUIDs involved marijuana only • Denver Police Department DUIDs involving marijuana increased 100 percent from 2013 (33) to 2014 (66). • In 2014, when retail marijuana businesses began operating, toxicology reports with positive marijuana results of active THC primarily related to driving under the influence increased 45 percent in only one year. Data for Traffic Deaths NOTE: • THE DATA FOR 2012 THROUGH 2014 WAS OBTAINED FROM THE NATIONAL HIGHWAY TRAFFIC SAFETY ADMINISTRATION'S FATALITY ANALYSIS REPORTING SYSTEM (FARS). COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS OF DATA WAS CONDUCTED BY ROCKY MOUNTAIN HIDTA AFTER CONTACTING ALL CORONER OFFICES AND LAW ENFORCEMENT AGENCIES INVOLVED WITH FATALITIES TO OBTAIN TOXICOLOGY REPORTS. THIS REPRESENTS 100 PERCENT REPORTING. PRIOR YEAR(S) MAY HAVE HAD LESS THAN 100 PERCENT REPORTING TO THE COLORADO DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION, AND SUBSEQUENTLY THE FATALITY ANALYSIS REPORTING SYSTEM (FARS). • 2014 FARS DATA WILL NOT BE OFFICIAL UNTIL TANUARY 2016, SECTION 1: Impaired Driving Page 115 148 of 669 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 3/September 2015 Number of Deaths 800 Total Number of Statewide Traffic Deaths 700 600 500 -L 465 447 472 400 300 — 200 -1 100 — 481 488 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 SOURCE: National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, Fatality Analysis Reporting System (FARS), 2006- 2013 and CDOT/RMHIDTA 2014 Crash Year Marijuana -Related Total Statewide Fatalities Traffic Deaths* Fatalities with Operators Testing Positive for Marijuana Percentage Total Fatalities (Marijuana) 2006 535 37 6.92% 2007 554 39 7.04% 2008 548 43 7.85% 2009 465 47 10.10% 2010 450 49 10.89% 2011 447 63 14.09% 2012 472 78 16.53% 2013 481 71 14.76% 2014 488 94 19.26% *Fatalities Involving Operators Testing Positive for Marijuana SOURCE: National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, Fatality Analysis Reporting System (FARS), 2006-- 2013 and CDOT/RMHIDTA 2014 SECTION 1: Impaired Driving Page 1 16 149 of 669 IJI The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 3/September 2015 Average Number 90 so 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 Average Number of Traffic Deaths Related to Marijuana * 2006-2008 2009-2012 Pre -Commercialization Post -Commercialization 2013-2014 Legalization *Average Ntunber of Fatalities when an Operator Tested Positive for Marijuana SOURCE: National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, Fatality Analysis Reporting System (FARS), 2006- 2013 and CDOT/RMHIDTA 2014 Numberof Deaths 100 90 -;-- 20 J- Commercialization 10 ±- 0 Traffic Deaths Related to Marijuana* 94 Legalization I T 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 *Number of Fatalities Involving Operators Testing Positive for Marijuana SOURCE: National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, Fatality Analysis Reporting System (FARS), 2006- 2013 and CDOT/RMHIDTA 2014 SECTION 1: Impaired Driving Page 117 150 of 669 f V V The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 3/September 2015 Percent of Deaths 25.00% 20.00% 15.00% Percent of All Traffic Deaths That Were Marijuana Related* 10.00% T 6.92% 7.04% 5.00% 0.00% Commercialization 10.10% 10.89% -7.85% 2006 2007 2008 16.53% 14.09°I° 14.76°f 7- 2009 2010 2011 2012 19.26% Legalization *Percent of All Fatalities Where the Operators Tested Positive for Marijuana SOURCE: 2013 2014 National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, Fatality Analysis Reporting System (FARS), 2006- 2013 and CDOT/RMHIDTA 2014 Crash Year 2006 Operators Testing Positive for Marijuana* Total Operators Involved in Crashes 795 Operators in Fatal Crashes Testing Positive for Marijuana 32 Percentage of Total Operators Who Tested Positive for Marijuana 2007 866 34 2008 782 39 2009 718 46 2010 652 45 2011 648 57 2012 732 70 2013 702 63 4.03% 3.93% 4.99% 6.41% 6.90% 8.81% 9.56% 2014 765 87 Operators Involved in Fatalities Testing Positive for Marijuana SOURCE: National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, Fatality Analysis Reporting System (FARS), 2006- 2013 and RMHIDTA 2014 8.97% 11.37% ❖ Consistent with the past, in 2014 still only 47 percent of operators involved in traffic deaths were tested for drug impairment. SECTION 1: Impaired Driving Page 118 151 of 669 I VJ The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Average Nu tuber 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 Average Number of Operators Testing Positive for Marijuana 2013-2014 Pre-Cornmerdalization Post -Commercialization Legalization SOURCE: National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, Fatality Analysis Reporting System (FARS), 2006- 2013 and CDOT/RMHIDTA 2014 Vol. 3/September 2015 30.00% 25.00% E 20.00% 1 0 15.00% 9.73% ° 10.00% 17QQOL 8.40% 0.1 0, 5.00% - — 0.00% 2006 2007 2006-2008 2009-2012 Percent of Operators Tested Who Were Positive for Marijuana* 24.03% 13.45% 13.72% Conuner7iahz' action 19.28% J821% 16.72% teialization 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 *Percent of All Operators Tested for Drug Impahment SOURCE: National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, Fatality Analysis Reporting System (FARS), 2006- 2013 and CDOT/RMHIDTA 2014 SECTION 1: Impaired Driving Page I 19 152 of 669 1 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 3/September 2015 Drug Combinations for Operators Positive for Marijuana* Marijuana and Other Drugs (No Alcohol) 15% Marijuana and Alcohol 37% Nor Marijuana, Other l)rugs and Alcohol 15% Mai ij uana ONLY 33% "Toxicology results for all substances present in individuals who tested positive for marijuana SOURCE: National Highway Traffic Safety Administration/Colorado Department of Transportation/Rocky Mountain HIDTA ❖ In 2014, of the operators who tested positive for marijuana, one out of three had only marijuana present in their system. Data for impaired Driving NOTE: THE NUMBER OF DUID ARRESTS IS NOT REFLECTIVE OF THE TOTAL NUMBER OF PEOPLE ARRESTED FOR DRIVING UNDER THE INFLUENCE WHO ARE INTOXICATED ON NON -ALCOHOL SUBSTANCES. IF SOMEONE IS DRIVING BOTH INTOXICATED ON ALCOHOL AND INTOXICATED ON ANY OTHER DRUG (INCLUDING MARIJUANA), ALCOHOL IS ALMOST ALWAYS THE ONLY INTOXICANT TESTED FOR. A DRIVER WHO TESTS OVER THE LEGAL LIMIT FOR ALCOHOL WILL BE CHARGED WITH DUI, EVEN IF HE OR SHE IS POSITIVE FOR OTHER DRUGS. HOWEVER, WHETHER OR NOT HE OR SHE IS POSITIVE FOR OTHER DRUGS WILL REMAIN UNKNOWN BECAUSE. OTHER DRUGS ARE NOT OFTEN TESTED FOR. SECTION 1: Impaired Driving Page 120 153 of 669 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol- 3/September 2015 YAM .wc 3sW xsm Trends in Cannabinoid Screens &THC Confirmations in Colorado 2009 - 2014 Cannabnaid screens • Positive Screens ;%positive of total) • Positive THC 2 ngjmL or higher. '2014 THC 1 nJmL or higher, S;b of pos. screens with THC confirmed) 1514 r''n 2809 1001 525f 41 2009 4263 4333 4371 58% 3987 Data horn Cherrolox leboralt, was mcr2ed vrilh dots wppltee by Colorado DepanmenlOf Pebk Health and Enrico repent -To. olory 1ab0ralbry for 2003- 2013 'Ow 1pa c ango in date wrection the canE nation wtettfiir►otitinTHC changed /cram 2 najmLp007. 2CL1) to 2 nafmt i20111. Based on a.atilde data II b estimated-lI%ol paler trodwtan Cowmen 3 and semi rot 3d In enestimated 4,77E PoLthcTHC at or above 2 nt/ml h 201,1. SOURCE: Sarah Urfer, M.S., D-ABFT-FT; ChemaTox Laboratory Explanation of ChemaTox Graphs The below three graphs are Rocky Mountain HIDTA's conversation of ChemaTox data into raw numbers. The first graph represents the total number of drug screens that were tested for cannabinoids. Of those screens tested, the second graph represents the number of cannabinoid positive screens. The third graph demonstrates, of those positive screens, how many were positive for active THC. SECTION 1: Impaired Driving Page 121 154 of 669 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Number of Screens 5,000 4,500 4,000 3,500 3,000 2500 2,000 1,500 1,000 500 0 Number of Cannabinoid Screens 2009 2010 SOURCE: Rocky Mountain HIDTA Number of Positive Screens 2011 2012 2013 Vol. 3/September 2015 2014 Number of Positive Cannabinoid Screens 2009 SOURCE: Rocky Mountain HIDTA 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 SECTION 1: Impaired Driving Page 1 22 155 of 669 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 3/September 2015 Number of Screenswith ActiveTHC 2,500 2,000 1,500 1,000 500 Number of Positive Cannabinoid Screens with Active THC 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 ■ lng/rnL ■ 2ng/mL ''"Due to a change in data collection, the confirmation cutoff for Positive THC changed from2ng/mL (2009-2013) to 1 ng/mL (2014). Based on available dataitis estimated-18% of cases would fall between 1 and2ng/mL resulting in an estimated 67% Positive THC at or above 2 ng/mLin 2014."1 SOURCE: Rocky Mountain HIDTA NOTE: THE ABOVE GRAPHS INCLUDE DATA FROM CHEMATOX LABORATORY WHICH WAS MERGED WITH DATA SUPPLIED BY COLORADO DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC HEALTH AND ENVIRONMENT - TOXICOLOGY LABORATORY. THE VAST MAJORITY OF THE SCREENS ARE DUID SUBMISSIONS FROM COLORADO LAW ENFORCEMENT. NOTE: COLORADO DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC HEALTH AND ENVIRONMENT DISCONTINUED TESTING IN JULY 2013. SECTION 1: Impaired Driving Page 23 156 of 669 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 3/September 2015 ual 0 E z 900 800 700 600 500 400 300 200 100 0 Colorado State Patrol Number of DUIDs, 2014 DUIDs Marijuana Only DUIDs Involving Marijuana Total Number of DUIDs SOURCE: Colorado State Patrol, CSP Citations for Drug Impairment by Drug Type, 2014 •:* 77 percent of total DUIDs involved marijuana •:+ 41 percent of total DUIDs involved marijuana only NOTE: "MARIJUANA CITATIONS DEFINED AS ANY CITATION WHERE CONTACT WAS CTTED FOR DRIVING UNDER THE INFLUENCE (DUI) OR DRIVING WHILE ABILITY IMPAIRED (DWAI) AND MARIJUANA INFORMATION WAS FILLED OUT ON TRAFFIC STOP FORM INDICATING MARIJUANA & ALCOHOL, MARIJUANA & OTHER CONTROLLED SUBSTANCES, OR MARIJUANA ONLY PRESENT BASED ON OFFICER OPINION ONLY (NO TOXICOLOGICAL CONFIRMATION)." - COLORADO STATE PATROL SECTION 1: Impaired Driving Page 124 157 of 669 I TJ The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 3/September 2015 Number of DUIDs 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 Denver Police Department Number of DUIDs Involving Marijuana 2013 2014 SOURCE: Denver Police Department, Traffic Investigations Bureau via Data Analysis Unit Aurora Police Department Number of DUIDs, 2014 150 a 100 a ,c E 50 z DUIDs Involving Marijuana SOURCE: Aurora Police Department, Traffic Division Total DUIDs ❖ 66 percent of total DUIDs involved marijuana. SECTION 1: Impaired Driving Page 125 158 of 669 I TV The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 3/September 2015 PercentPositive 60.00% 59.00% 58.00% 57.00% 56.00% 55.00% 54.00% 53.00% 52.00% 51.00% Larimer County Sheriff's Office Percent of DUIDs Involving Marijuana* 2013 *Percent of all DUID blood samples submitted for drug testing SOURCE: Larimer County Sheriff's Office, Records Unit Numberof DUI Admissions 2014 Number of DUI Admissions to Arapahoe House with Marijuana as a Self -Reported Drug of Choice 2013 SOURCE: Arapahoe House, Public Communications Office 2014 SECTION 1: Impaired Driving Page 126 159 of 669 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Number of Accidents Vol. 3/September 2015 Total Number of Accidents in Colorado 20,000 0I- 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 SOURCE: Colorado Department of Transportation (CDOT) ❖ 15 percent increase from 2012 to 2014 Related Costs Economic Cost of Vehicle Accidents Resulting in Fatalities: According to the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration report, The Economic and Societal Impact Of Motor Vehicles Crashes, 2010, the total economic costs for a vehicle fatality is $1,398,916. That includes property damage, medical, insurance, productivity, among other considerations. Cost of Driving Under the Influence: The cost associated with the first driving - under -the -influence offense (DUI) is estimated at $10,270. Costs associated with a DUID (driving -under -the -influence -of -drugs) are very similar to those of a DUI/alcohol' SECTION 1: Impaired Driving Page 127 160 of 669 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 3/September 2015 Drug Recognition Experts According to the Colorado Department of Transportation Drug Recognition Experts (DRE) Coordinator, in 2014, 290 individuals evaluated (48.49 percent) showed signs of marijuana impairment.4 Case Examples and Related Material Both Drivers Killed Were "Stoned": Two females, one 28 and the other 49, died in an automobile crash on September 29, 2014 in Longmont, Colorado. "Both drivers had more than 5 ng/mL of THC in their systems..." The younger woman, who was believed to be the primary cause of the accident, was also under the influence of alcohol. This woman was the mother of twin 3-year-olds who were in the vehicle but survived.5 Hit and Run Kills Veteran: In April 2014, the driver of a vehicle ran into the back of a motorcycle sending the cyclist flying into the street. The driver of the vehicle, who had blood alcohol content (BAC) of 2.5 and marijuana in his system', failed to stop and went home. The driver of the motorcycle was a 23-year-old airman stationed at Buckley Air Force Base involved in the Global Missile Warning System. The driver of the vehicle, a 32-year-old and former president of his fraternity at Colorado State University, was sentenced to 12 years in prison.6 Teen Driver Under the Influence Kills a High School Student: In November 2014, a teenager driving under the influence of marijuana hit and killed a 16-year-old high school student. One of the passengers in the vehicle said that the driver had been smoking "weed" in the car and was too high to drive safely. Another friend told law enforcement and he and the driver had smoked "weed" before driving to the high school the day of the crash. He said that he tried to convince the driver not to take the wheel but the driver refused. According to police the driver had trouble walking a straight line, following directions and smelled like marijuana.' One Died in Three -Car Accident During Morning Commute: In January 2013, during the morning commute, a Jeep hit the back of a Subaru station wagon as both vehicles were headed eastbound on U.S. 36. The driver of the Jeep lost control and the vehicle flipped, ejecting the driver who died at the scene.' The driver of the Jeep tested positive for marijuana only.. ' Information obtained by Rocky Mountain HIDTA not published in the original article. SECTION 1: Impaired Driving Page 128 161 of 669 I Y The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 3/September 2013 Driver and Passenger Engulfed in Flames: On August 3, 2015 at 6:30 in the morning, 25-year-old Ricardo Gardea drove his SUV through a neighborhood careening through traffic. He was spotted by police prior to the crash and estimated to be driving at about 100 mph. He ran a red light and began "pinballing" off cars in the intersection. He eventually slammed into the back of a Jeep which was "hurtled roughly a block." The gas tank exploded, engulfing the driver and his passenger in flames. The police officer at the scene called in "we need the paramedics in here quick because this person is still moving, but he, uh, he's on fire." The driver of the vehicle, whose burns covered 65 percent of his body, died leaving behind a 7-month-old daughter. The passenger of the vehicle was seriously injured. Gardea, who caused this six -vehicle accident, fled the scene on foot but was subsequently arrested. According to the police report, "Gardea told investigators that he was under the influence of marijuana and had been drinking." The 25-year-old has a criminal record dating back to 2007 including more than 20 arrests.' Hit and Run Kills One: An SUV crashed into a minivan driven by a mother with two children inside. The crash happened at Peoria and 51st Street a little after midnight. Both the driver and the passenger of the SUV left the scene of the accident, taking off running. The driver was later arrested and tested positive for marijuana only.- The mother died from her injuries, the 6-year-old had serious injuries and the 11-year-old minor injuries.70 Drag Racing Kills Two: In June 2013, while drag racing a driver lost control of his vehicle and struck another vehicle head on. This happened at about 8:30 p.m. at Constitution Avenue just east of Circle Drive in Colorado Springs. The driver, who was allegedly drag racing, was killed as was the driver of the other vehicle who was an 84- year-old woman. The driver was a 25-year-old male who tested positive for marijuana only.11 Pedestrian Killed: In June 2013 a pedestrian was hit and killed when crossing a street at the 1400 block of South Nevada Avenue in Colorado Springs, Colorado. The driver of the vehicle was not charged because the pedestrian was not crossing at a crosswalk.12 The pedestrian tested positive for marijuana only. - Bicyclist Died from a Collision: A bicyclist cycling eastbound on westbound lanes of 100th Avenue in Thornton didn't stop at a stop light at the intersection with Colorado Boulevard. The bicyclist was struck by a GMC pick-up at about 10:30 p.m.13 The bicyclist, who was at fault, tested positive for marijuana and oxycodone, died.. SECTION 1: Impaired Driving Page 129 162 of 669 I J V The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 31September 2015 Injured Teacher No Fan of Marijuana: An article in The Pueblo Chieftain dated June 21, 2015 tells the story of a young schoolteacher who was crippled from a head-on collision by a truck driven by a man under the influence of marijuana. Witnesses to the accident saw the driver of the truck stumbling out of a Loaf 'N Jug and enter his truck. The observers were so alarmed they called authorities and then followed him so they could report his location. They then watched him weave across the lines of the highway and smash head-on into the young teacher's vehicle. They searched the vehicle and subsequently discovered small amounts of marijuana inside a marijuana grinder. The Pueblo West High School mathematics teacher said, "People didn't know what they were voting for. And if it continues to grow as it has since being legalized, there will be a lot more drivers who are high, and a lot more victims Iike me."14 Driver High on Pot Causes Crash that Injures Six: In July 2014, a 22-year-old woman was speeding eastbound on Colfax Avenue at about 2:30 in the morning. She ran a red light at Speer Boulevard and collided with another vehicle. Apparently she was driving 60 mph in a 30 mph zone when the accident, injuring six people, occurred. The young female admitted to "drinking one beer and smoked a bowl of marijuana." "A just -completed study on medical marijuana by University of Colorado researchers found the proportion of marijuana -positive drivers involved in fatal crashes in Colorado increased dramatically since the middle of 2009. That's when medical marijuana was commercialised in the state."15 Pilot Error Caused Fatal 2013 Plane Crash: In December 2013, a pilot and her two passengers were killed when the airplane stalled and went into a spin prior to crashing into a remote snow-covered area on the Western Slope. The National Transportation Safety Board report said that the pilot failed to maintain adequate air speed while flying in low altitude, causing the wreck. A toxicology test showed that the pilot had consumed marijuana prior to the accident but there was not enough evidence to determine impairment.16 Drugged Driving Increases: It was brought to the attention of Rocky Mountain HIDTA that although the article "Drug Use on I.I.S. Roads Rises as Drunken Driving Drops," was correctly cited and used in this report; the article itself misquotes a study from the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA). Therefore, we have removed that entry from our publication. Buying Auto Insurance to Combat Pothead Drivers: A 2007 study by the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration found that marijuana was the most common drug used by drivers. "This sample found that about 4 percent of drivers were high during day and more than 6 percent at night." SECTION 1: Impaired Driving Page 130 163 of 669 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol, 3/September 2015 Researchers from Columbia University's Mailman School of Public Health, examining over 23,500 fatal car crashes, found that marijuana contributed to 12 percent of the deaths in 2010 from only 4 percent in 1999. "But increased danger on the road from stoned drivers in states where use is legal means all drivers should consider additional auto insurance, such as uninsured/underinsured motor coverage..." This came from Insurance Information Institute spokesperson Loretta Worters.'7 Study on Marijuana -Impaired Drivers. The National Institute on Drug Abuse and the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration funded a study of 18 persons behind the wheel of a driving simulator who were given different combinations of marijuana, alcohol and/or a placebo. The study revealed that newer marijuana users were worse drivers at just 1 or 2 nanograms than heavy marijuana users. Also of note for the study: • "THC moved more rapidly than alcohol out of the bloodstream and into the body, making it harder to detect accurately with a blood test." Also of note from this study: • "Some heavy users had detectable THC in their body for nearly a month, and they performed some tasks worse up to three weeks after they last consumed marijuana." • "Drivers who drank alcohol and smoked marijuana saw a stronger "high" than with pot alone..." • Combining alcohol and marijuana impairs the driver to a greater degree than just one or the other. Marilyn Huestis, chief of chemistry and drug metabolism of the Intramural Research Program at the National Institute on Drug Abuse, stated, "One of the things we know happens with cannabis is that it reduces your field of vision and you get tunnel vision, so you're unable to react as quickly."18,19 70 Percent of Marijuana Users Have Driven Under the Influence: The National Cannabis Prevention and Information Centre (NCPIC) surveyed 4,600 Australians and found that 70 percent of recent marijuana users had driven under the influence of the drug. The primary researcher, Dr. Gates, stated, "We know from research that any cannabis use will affect your tracking ability, your reaction time, your attention span, your awareness of distance, your co- ordination, concentration." He said, "It is time for a wake-up call."20 SECTION 1: Impaired Driving Page 131 164 of 669 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 3/September 2015 Sources 1 Sarah Urfer, ChemaTox Laboratory. ' U.S. Department of Transportation National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, "The Economic and Societal Impact Of Motor Vehicle Crashes, 2010," May 2014, <http://www.nrd.nhtsa.dot.gov/pubs/812013.pdf>, accessed February 19, 2015 Cost of a DUI brochure, <https://www.codot.gov/library/brochures/COSTDUI09.pdf/view>, accessed February 19, 2015 4 Colorado Department of Transportation, 2015 Anica Padilla, ABC7 News -Denver, December 3, 2014, "Police: Both drivers killed in Longmont crash were stoned, one had also been drinking", <http://www. thedenverchannel. com/news/local-news/police-bath-drivers-killed-in- longmont-crash-were-stoned-one-had-also-been-drinking>, accessed December 3, 2014 6 Raquel Villanueva and Blair Shiff, KUSA-9 News, November 14, 2014, "Man get 12 years for hit-and-run that killed airman," <http://www.9news.com/story/news/loca1/2014/11/14/man-sentenced-in-hit-and-run- that-killed-an-airman/19027447/>, accessed July 23, 2015 ' Megan Quinn, Broomfield News, March 17, 2015, "Police: Teen driver who struck. Killed Broomfield HS student Chad Britton was high at time of accident, <http ://www.broomfieldenterp ris e. com/broomfield-news/ci_27729745/police-teen- driver-who-struck-killed-broomfield-hs>, accessed March 18, 2015 s Mitchel Byars, The Denver Post/Lifestyles section, January 22, 2013, "1 dead after 3- car accident closes U.S. 36 for hours during morning commute", <http ://www. denverp o st. com/ci_22423991 /u-s-36-shut-down- after -possibly -fatal>, accessed December 3, 2014 9 Jesse Paul, The Denver Post, "Denver Hit-and-Run/Police ID suspect in deadly wreck," August 5, 2015 SECTION 1: Impaired Driving Page 132 165 of 669 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 3/September 2015 1° KUSA 9News/Denver, December 25, 2013, "1 killed, 3 injured in Denver hit-and- run," http://archive.9news.comInews/local/article/370380/346/1-killed-3-injured-in- Denver-hit-and-run, accessed December 4, 2014 " Travis Ruiz, FOX21News.com, June 24, 2013, "Two people killed in possible street - racing crash", <http://fox2lnews.com/2013/06/24/two-people-killed-in-possible-street- racing-crash/>, accessed December 3, 2014 72 Travis Ruiz, Fox2lnews.com, June 24, 2013, "Springs police: Pedestrian killed when crossing street," <http://fox2lnews.cam/2013/06/24/springs-police-pedestrian- killed-when-crossing-street/>, accessed December 3, 2014 13 9News Staff, KUSA-Channel 9 Denver, March 10, 2013, "Police: Bicyclist at fault in fatal weekend collision," <http://www.9news.com/story/news/local/2014/02/25/1847780/>, accessed December 4, 2014 14 Steven Henson, The Pueblo Chieftain, June 21, 2015, "Injured teacher no fan of marijuana," <http://www.chieftain.com/news/3695332-120/driver-marijuana-pueblo- driving>, accessed June 22, 2015 75 Dave Young, KDVR.com, July 30, 2014, "Driver accused of causing crash that hurt 6 was high on pot, DA says," <http://kdvr.com/2014/07/30/22-year-old-woman-charged- with-driving-high-assaulting-six-people/,>accessed July 23, 2015 16 The Associated Press, May 5, 2015, "Pilot error caused fatal 2013 plane crash," <http://www.9news. com/story/news/crime/2015/05/05/grand-junction-pilot-error-plane- crash-2013/26916463/>, accessed May 7, 2015 17 Ed Leefeldt, insurance.com, April 29, 2014, "Buying auto insurance to combat pothead drivers," <http://www.insurance.com/auto-insurance/coverage/buying-auto- insurance-combat-pothead-drivers.html>, accessed October 20, 2014 18 Trevor Hughes, USA Today, June 23, 2015, "Study analyzes how much pot impairs drivers," <http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/2015/06/23/marijuana- drivers/29155165/>, accessed June 25, 2015 14 DailyMail.com reporter, June 24, 2015, "Official: Cannabis use impairs driving as much as alcohol says first of its kind study while drug's legality continues to spread," <http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article- SECTION 1: Impaired Driving Page 133 166 of 669 I J 4 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 3/September 2015 3137943/Marijuana-DOES-imp air-driving-kind-comprehensive-government- study-reveals-cannabis-use-affect-motor-skills-three-drinks.html>, accessed June 25, 2015 20 Andrew Griffits, ABCNews.net, June 9, 2015, "Nearly 70 per cent of cannabis users report driving under the influence: research," <http://www. abc. net. au/news/2015-06 -10/cannabis-users-repo rt-driving-under- influence/6534368>, accessed June 22, 2015 SECTION 1: Impaired Driving Page ! 34 167 of 669 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 3/September2015 SECTION 2: Youth Marijuana Use Introduction The following section reviews youth use rates of marijuana in Colorado and nationally. Datasets examine reported use "within the last 30 days" as opposed to "lifetime" usage. The use of the 30-day data provides a more accurate picture and is classified as current use. The lifetime data collection model typically includes individuals who are infrequent or experimental users of marijuana. Most of the comparisons are between 2006 through 2013. The information compares the early medical marijuana era (2006 - 2008), the medical marijuana commercialization and expansion era (2009 - current) and the recreational marijuana era (2013 -current) in Colorado. • 2006 -2008: There were between 1,000 and 4,800 medical marijuana cardholders and no known dispensaries operating in Colorado. • 2009 - Current: There were over 108,000 medical marijuana cardholders and 532 licensed dispensaries operating in Colorado by the end of 2012. See the introduction at the beginning of this report for more details on the commercialization and explosion of Colorado's medical marijuana trade. • 2013 - Current: In November 2012, Colorado voters passed Constitutional Amendment 64 which legalized marijuana for recreational purposes for anyone over 21 years of age. The amendment also allowed for licensed marijuana retail stores, cultivation operations and edibles manufacturing. Some Findings • Youth (ages 12 to 17 years old) Past Month Marijuana Use, 2013 o Colorado average for youth was 11.16 percent SECTION 2: Youth Marijuana Use Page 135 168 of 669 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 3/September 2015 o National average for youth was 7.15 percent • Colorado was ranked 3rd in the nation for current marijuana use among youth (56.08 percent higher than the national average) • In 2006, Colorado ranked 14th in the nation for current marijuana use among youth • Between pre -commercialization and post -commercialization of medical marijuana, there was a 24 percent increase in youth (ages 12 to 17 years old) monthly marijuana use. There was an 8 percent increase in just one year after legalization of recreational marijuana in 2013. • The top ten states for the highest rate of current marijuana use were all medical marijuana states whereas the bottom ten were all non -medical -marijuana states. • There was a 40 percent increase in drug -related suspensions and expulsions in Colorado from school year 2008/2009 to 2013/2014. • There was a 20 percent increase in the percent of 12 to 17 year old probationers testing positive for marijuana since marijuana was legalized for recreational purposes. • A June, 2015 Rocky Mountain HIDTA survey of 95 Colorado school resource officers (SROs) and an August 2015 survey of 188 Colorado school counselors reveals: o The majority have experienced an increase in student marijuana -related incidents since recreational marijuana was legalized. o The most common violations on campus are possession and being under the influence during school hours. o Most students obtain their marijuana from a friend who gets it legally, or from their parents/family member(s). NOTE: SAMHSA RELEASED NATIONAL DATA ON DRUG USE FOR 2014 IN SEPTEMBER 2015. HOWEVER, STATE DRUG USE DATA FOR 2014 WILL NOT BE AVAILABLE UNTIL TOWARD THE END OF 2015. SECTION 2: Youth Marijuana Use Page 136 169 of 669 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 3!September 2015 Data Average Percent 12.0O% 10.00% 8 . 0 0 % 6. 00% 4.00% 2_00% 0.00% Colorado Average Past Month Use of Marijuana Ages 12 to 17 Years Old 2013 (Pre-Commerciali7adon) (Post -Commercialization) (Legalization) SOURCE: SAMHSA.gov, National Survey on Drug Use and Health 2012 and 2013 Average Percentage 2006-2008 2009-2012 Youth (Ages 12 to 17 Years Old) Past Month Marijuana Use National vs. Colorado Commercialization 12.00 10.00 8.00 6.00 400 2.00 Legalization 0.00 2 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 ■ National Average 6.74 6.67 6.67 7.03 7.38 7.64 7. 55 7.15 ■ Colorado Average 7.60 8.15 9.13 10.17 9.91 10.72 10.47 11.16 SOURCE: SAMHSA.gov, National Survey on Drug Use and Health, 2006-2013 SECTION 2: Youth Marijuana Use Page 137 170 of 669 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 3/September 2015 Prevalence of Past 30-Day Marijuana Use, 12 to 17 Years Old, 2006-2012 12.00% 10.00% w 8.00% ▪ 6.00% a • 4.00% d 2.00% 0.00% United States Colorado Denver Metro ■ 2006-2008 ■ 2008-2010 r_ 2010-2012 SOURCE: Denver Epidemiology Working Group (DEWG), Denver Office of Drug Strategy, October 29, 2014 and National Survey of Drug Use and Health, Sub -state Estimates 2006 — 2012 Average Percentage 12.0% 10.0% S.0% 6.0% 4.0% 2.0% 0.0% National Average Past Month Use by 12 to 17 Years Old, 2013 Non -Medical Marijuana Medical Marijuana Recreational/Medical States States Marijuana States SOURCE: SAMHSA.gov, National Survey on Drug Use and Health 2012 and 2013 SECTION 2: Youth Marijuana Use Page 138 171 of 669 I Jv The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 3/September 2015 State -by -State Past Month Usage by 12 to 17 Years Old, 2013 Rhode island Vermont Colorado Washington New Hampshire Oregon Hawaii Maine New Mexico Delaware Michigan Massachusetts Alaska Montana Connecticut Nevada Arizona New York California Florida Maryland Ohio Wisconsin Georgia South Carolina Missouri Pennsylvania Minnesota North Carolina Illinois Iowa Nebraska Virginia Tennessee Indiana Wyoming Texas Arkansas Idaho New Jersey Utah West Virgina North Dakota Oklahoma Mississippi South Dakota Louisiana Kansas Kentucky Alabama As of 2013: Legalized Recreational/Medical Marijuana State Legalized Medical MarijuanaState Non -legalized Medical Marij uana State 0.00% 200% 4.00% b.00% 8.00% 10.00% 12.00% 14.00% Average Percentage SOURCE: SAMHSA.gov, National Survey on Drug Use and Health 2012 and 2013 SECTION 2: Youth Marijuana Use Page 139 172 of 669 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact VoI. 3/September 2015 States for Past Month Marijuana Use Youth (12 to 17 Years Old), 20131 Top 10 Bottom 10 (Medical Marijuana States in 2013) (Non -Medical Marijuana States in 2013) National Rate = 7.15% 1. Rhode Island -12.95% 2. Vermont -11.34% 3. ++Colorado - 11.16% 4. ++Washington - 9.81% 5. New Hampshire - 9.62% 6. Oregon - 9.59% 7. Hawaii - 9,55% 8. Maine - 9.26% 9. New Mexico - 9.22% 10. Delaware - 9.15% 41. Utah - 5.35% 42. West Virginia - 5.23% 43. North Dakota - 5.19% 44. Oklahoma - 5.16% 45. Mississippi - 5.13% 46. South Dakota - 5.13% 47. Kansas - 5.09% 48. Louisiana - 5.09% 49. Kentucky - 5.07% 50. Alabama - 4.81% ++ Legalized recreational marijuana in 2013 Number of Students 6,000 5,000 4,000 3,000 2,000 1,000 0 Drug -Related Suspensions/Expulsions ,7aa 3,833 3,779 3,736 5,417 5,249 4,965279 4,933 Commercialization Legalization e ��b ��� �e ry�g °�° ti°1 ,y°tip, e e ‘6,3Academic Years SOURCE: Colorado Department of Education, 10-Year Trend Data: State Suspension and Expulsion Incident Rates and Reasons SECTION 2: Youth Marijuana Use Page 140 173 of 669 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 3/September 2015 NOTE: THE COLORADO DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION INCLUDED ALL DRUGS IN THIS DATASET. HOWEVER, DEPARTMENT OFFICIALS REPORTED THAT MOST DRUG -RELATED SUSPENSIONS/EXPULSIONS REPORTED SINCE THE 2008/2009 ACADEMIC YEAR HAVE BEEN RELATED TO MARIJUANA.R a .° 6,000 S 5,000 x E 4,000 3,000 •- 2,000 1,000 c vs Average Drug -Related Suspensions/Expulsions 2004-2005 to 2008-2009 AcadeniicYears 2009-2010 to 2013-2014 SOURCE: Colorado Department of Education, 10-Year Trend Data: State Suspension and Expulsion Incident Rates and Reasons SECTION 2: Youth Marijuana Use Page 141 174 of 669 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 3/September 2015 Percentage of Total Suspensions 7 6 a 4 3 2 1 0 Percentage of Total Suspensions in Colorado from 2004-2014 School Years Commercialization 5.0 5.1 # 32 3.2 3.0 3.1 3.1 Legalization �� ti°� ' ti°o� �' „,9 � �' ,yfl�� ,you°. 10 Academic Years -4--Drug Violations Alcohol Violations SOURCE: Colorado Department of Education, 10-Year Trend Data: State Suspension and Expulsion Incident Rates and Reasons Percentage of Total Expulsions Percentage of Total Expulsions in Colorado from 2004-2014 School Years 4S -- — — — -43:7 - 44:9- 40 1-- 35 30 25 . 23.7 2 4� 20 15 10 38.8 36;6 34.8 Commercialization Legalization 5 3.4 4A 24 32 _24 2.6 2s8 3.02.7 0 re 10' AcademicYears -0-Drug Violations f-Alcohol Violations SOURCE: Colorado Department of Education, 10-Year Trend Data: State Suspension and Expulsion Incident Rates and Reasons SECTION 2: Youth Marijuana Use Page 142 175 of 669 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 3/September 2015 Percentage of Total Referrals to Law Enforcement in Colorado from 2004-2014 School Years 1 . 35 i 32.3 36,8 0,7 28.9 1 23.3 23.4 24.1 23.5 24i1.....,.....- Fi-4-i-- -^----5 ------.; -O---- fi Legalization . — -- -- --- Commercialization 40 3-4.1 } 10 6.8 8.0 7.5 6.3 6.6 5.3 4.9 49 ▪ 5 • 1 • I 15t: 4 4' cf5) e e• AcademicYears -4-Drug Violations -a-Alcohol Violations SOURCE: Colorado Department of Education,10-Year Trend Data: State Suspension and Expulsion Incident Rates and Reasons Colorado Probation Average Percent Positive THC Urinalyses Ages 12 to 17 Years Old QJ 35.0O% ":‘' 30.00% 4.4 • 25.00% I 20.00% 5• 1 .00% to 4,10.00`v1 • ° 5 CO'Y 0) • < 0.00% 2006-2008 (Pre - Commercialization) 2009-2012 Post - commercialization) 2013-2014 (Legal'izaticrn) SOURCE: State of Colorado Judicial Branch, Division of Probation Services SECTION 2: Youth Marijuana Use Page 1 43 176 of 669 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 3ISeptember 2015 Colorado School Resource Officer Survey3 In June 2015, 95 school resource officers (SROs) completed a survey concerning marijuana at schools. The majority were assigned to high schools with an average tenure of six years as an SRO. They were asked for their professional opinion on a number of questions induding: • Since the legalization of recreational marijuana, what impact has there been on marijuana -related incidents at your school? o 90 percent reported an increase in incidents o 9 percent reported no change in incidents o 1 percent reported a slight decrease in incidents • What were the most predominant marijuana violations on campus? o 51 percent reported possession of marijuana o 42 percent reported being under the influence during school hours o 4 percent reported selling marijuana to other students o 2 percent reported sharing marijuana with other students o 1 percent reported possession of marijuana -infused edibles Percent of Responses 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% O%O Predominant Marijuana Violations, 2015 Student in Student Student selling Student under Student in possession of sharing marijuana to the influence possession of marijuana marijuana with other students during school marijuana infusededibles other students hours SOURCE Colorado Association of School Resource Officers (CASRO) and Rocky Mountain HIDTA SECTION 2: Youth Marijuana Use Page 144 177 of 669 o J The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 3/September 2015 • Where do the students get their marijuana? o 39 percent reported friends who obtain it legally o 30 percent reported from their parents o 18 percent reported from the black market o 6 percent reported from retail marijuana stores o 3 percent reported from medical marijuana cardholders o 2 percent reported from medical marijuana caregivers o 1 percent reported from medical marijuana dispensaries Percent of Responses 40% 35% 30% 25% 20°%0 15% 10 5% 0% Medical Marijuana Dispensaries Student Marijuana Source, 2015 Friend Who Obtained it Leggy SOURCE: Colorado Association of School Resource Officers (CASRO) and Rocky Mountain HIDTA Medical Marijuana Caregivers Medical Marijuana Cardholders Retail Marijuana Stores Some Comments from School Resource Officers Black Market Parents 6th Grade Users: "I have 6th graders that smoke marijuana before school. They steal it from their parents or older siblings." Pick Up Tool: "One junior boy, while in class and trying to pick up girls in his class. Offered to share marijuana edibles (Rice Krispy treats/fruity pebbles infused) to three girls in his class while asking for their phone numbers." SECTION 2: Youth Marijuana Use Page 145 178 of 669 r u The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 3/September 2015 Medical Marijuana Card for 18th Birthday: "During the spring I made contact with a student under the influence of marijuana with friends in an alley. After taking them back to my office to write citations. A female who was 18 years old had a marijuana card. She related that her parents took her to get it on her birthday. I advised her she had to be 21 regardless of her card." School to ER: Had two marijuana overdoses requiring ambulance transport to ER. Both incidents were 14 year old females." Increased Incidents: "Numbers of incidents are climbing each year in a school of 430. 2012-2013 (5 incidents) 2013-2014 (11 incidents) 2014-2015 (18 incidents)" 15-Year-Old Marijuana Card Holder: "15 year old with red card obtaining marijuana from friends in tobacco form. Attempted to give it to other females if they would smoke with him. Same student was caught with pipes one month before, the student attempted to fight with staff to keep them from searching him." 17-Year-Old Assaults Father: "17 year old male refused to hang up cell phone during class. Student caused disruption in class attempted to physically stop principal from taking his backpack subsequent search found marijuana in his backpack. Suspect later assaulted his father and was taken into custody." Father's Joint: "In April 2015, five middle school students were observed on the playground passing around what appeared to be a marijuana joint. When contacted, each admitted to consuming marijuana on campus. When asked were (sic) the marijuana was obtained, one of the students admitted taking it from his father." Vapor Pens: "Students smoking marijuana in class out of vapor pens. 8 year old found in possession of vapor pens and test positive for marijuana." School Counselor Survey4 In August 2015, 188 school counselors completed a survey concerning the legalization of marijuana at schools. The majority were assigned to high schools with SECTION 2: Youth Marijuana Use Page 146 179 of 669 rvr The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol, 3,' September 2015 an average tenure of ten years, They were asked for their professional opinion on a number of questions including: • Since the legalization of recreational marijuana, what impact has there been on marijuana -related incidents at your school? o 69 percent reported an increase in incidents o 30 percent reported no change in incidents o 2 percent reported a slight decrease in incidents • What were the most predominant marijuana violations on campus? o 51 percent reported being under the influence during school hours o 30 percent reported possession of marijuana o 9 percent reported possession of marijuana -infused edibles o 6 percent reported sharing marijuana with other students o 5 percent reported selling marijuana to other students Predominant Marijuana Violations, 2015 Student selling Student sharing Student in Student in Student under the marijuana to other marijuana with possession of possession of influence daring students other students marijuana infused marijuana school hours edibles SOURCE Colorado School Counselor Association (CSCA) and Rocky Mountain HIDTA SECTION 2: Youth Marijuana Use Page 147 180 of 669 r uu The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 3/September 2015 • Where do the students get their marijuana? o 29 percent reported friends who obtain it legally o 25 percent reported from their siblings or other family members O 21 percent reported from their parents o 18 percent reported from the black market O 3 percent reported from retail marijuana stores c 2 percent reported from medical marijuana dispensaries O 1 percent reported from medical marijuana cardholders a 1 percent reported from medical marijuana caregivers Percent of Responses 30% 25% 20% 15% 10% 5% 0% Medical Marijuana Cardholders Student Marijuana Source, 2015 Medical Marijuana Caregivers Medical Marijuana Dispensaries Retail Marijuana Stores B1ackMarket Parents Siblings/Other Friend w1 Family obtained it Members legally SOURCE Colorado School Counselor Association (CSCA) and Rocky Mountain HIDTA Some Comments from School Counselors Halls Reek of Pot After Lunch: • "Many kids come back from lunch highly intoxicated from marijuana use. Halls reek of pot, so many kids are high that it is impossible to apprehend all but the most impaired." • "They go off campus and smoke during lunch with friends. They will run home with friends during lunch and smoke then." SECTION 2: Youth Marijuana Use Page 148 181 of 669 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 3/September 2015 • "There have been several instances of students in their cars on lunch or during their off hours 'hotboxing' or smoking marijuana. Most students are seniors but on occasion, seniors will provide marijuana to 9th or 10th grade students." • "2014/2015 school year, several students caught coming back from off - campus lunch under the influence of marijuana." • "Had a student come back from lunch, teacher believed that they were high. Student was escorted to the office, student admitted they were indeed high to the administrator." • "Students are often referred after lunch (open campus) after they have been riding around smoking marijuana with their friends." • "More and more students are coming back to school high after lunch." • "In April 2015, students were going out for a break. 2-3 students smoked marijuana about a block away from school. They smelled like pot when they got back" Arrives at School Stoned: • "At the beginning of the second semester, three middle school boys were routinely arriving late at school, and noticeable intoxicated." • "We have middle school students who either come to school high, or have it on them in a bag. Or they have pipes on them." • "In May 2015, a teacher witnessed 2 seniors smoking marijuana while driving to school. One student admitted to having done so; the other denied it" • "Teaching a lesson in class during first period that started 7:30 AM and 2 students were already high in class." • "A male 13 y/o student fell asleep in several classes. He was interviewed by the school counselor and the RSO (sic). He was assessed as being high and admitted that he uses marijuana often before school. He steals it from his older brother." • "12 yr. old, sixth grader, was suspected of coming to summer school high. When confronted he told the teacher that he smoked it at home the night before but denied being high at the time. Later, he confirmed that he had smoked early that morning. The marijuana came from his mother's stash." New Use of Bathrooms: • "Students using in the bathroom." • "2 students were smoking marijuana in the restroom last year." • "8th grade male student had marijuana in his locker, classmates reported it. 8th grade female student smoked a joint in a school bathroom during school hours. Shared it with a friend." SECTION 2: Youth Marijuana Use Page 149 182 of 669 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 3/September 2015 • "7th grade girl last year had hidden marijuana and a pipe in the girl's restroom and told several friends who began getting bathroom break passes from various classrooms. Security noted an increased traffic flow to and from that restroom and found the weed and soon after the violators." It's Legal: • "3 or 4 times in the last school year, students have come to school under the influence after meeting at homes where parents were absent, sharing marijuana off campus and then bringing it on campus. 7th and 8th grade students have been involved, and most often their reaction when caught is 'it's legal'." • "I met with at least 5 students last year alone that have been showing significant signs of drug use or were caught and they all said they will not stop using weed on a daily basis. Their justification was it's fine because it's legal. If it's legal it's not as bad as what adults say about the risks." rust a Plant: • "In March of 2015 a fifth grade boy offered marijuana to another fifth grader on the playground. In October of 2014 a kindergarten girl described the pipe in her grandmother's car and the store where you go to buy pipes. In May of 2015 a first grade girl reported that her mom smokes weed in the garage. 'It's not a drug, it's just a plant'." Grades Decline: • "I would like to say that in general our Marijuana incidents have not gone up. We have a savvy population that knows to keep it away from school. However, I have seen a huge spike in talking with kids about it in my sessions. Last year I had two very intelligent students (above 4.0) that used marijuana 2-6 times a week. Both of them had grades decline and significant social emotional issues spike in the Spring of their Senior Year. They also both had violations at school." Dad Allows Pot Smoking: • "We had reports of two students (brothers) appear to be high at school. Our officer assessed both of them and discovered that their father, who had a medical marijuana card, was having them both "smoke a bowl" before school. He thought it would make their school day easier." SECTION 2: Youth Marijuana Ise Page 1 50 183 of 669 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 3/September 2015 Parents High: • "At our elementary school, we have noticed an increased number of parents showing up to school high. Kids have also brought [marijuana] to school to show their friends." Difficulty in Assessment: • "For school personnel, it is more difficult to evaluate what substance a student is under the influence of. We can smell alcohol and smoked marijuana but the edibles and vapes are hard to detect." Warning: Drug Canines: • "I would like to just offer that we need policy that allows for more use of drug dogs and not having to forewarn students or parents when these dogs will be present. Students and especially dealers, the ones we need to catch, are very vigilant in making adjustments when these resources are used." SECTION 2: Youth Marijuana Use Page 151 184 of 669 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 3/September 2015 Youth Use Surveys Not Utilized and Why After careful analysis and consideration, Rocky Mountain HIDTA did not use the following datasets in this report because of the following reasons: Centers for Disease Control Youth Risk Behavior Survey (YRBS): In 2013, Colorado fell short of the required number of student responses and was, therefore, not included. Additionally, upon further review, it was discovered that since 1991 the state of Colorado has only been represented in the High School YRBS survey with weighted data four times. Since 1995, Colorado has only been represented in the Middle School YRBS survey by weighted data twice. States that participated in the 2013 Middle School and High School YRBS surveys are represented in dark blue in the below maps. It should be noted, in 2013, high schools in the following eight states were not included with high school data: California, Colorado, Oregon, Washington, Minnesota, Illinois, Iowa and Pennsylvania. San Frmisce, Centers for Disease Control Youth Risk Behavior Survey 2013 YRBS Participation Map Middle Schools ,Ne.bgoTr•e alc� r t i dr0rtliA mit �1Se�bkdmkea•s 41i la.TX n l•..lglad..la• s ❑ W.c•rtwpae • ode tad a LLbeghla4411k-t•r•e•1•A ebdpercn•.M nags dnd[e•em ti ken gawk r :,a • Aaeb,pan ♦ l••c • modem Elwaa shack • Mu High Schools Los AKA.. sore you ✓ Ylpandf/.1•Nli• ❑ l..wldM.aseaete.f n d4ea1a•404 • 1MdalddfehidnbiAlat4 t•bitc swadlaaRi o OrmliMed•wn Mliv.lW aRY•^^•nmetasiS Mme•SpnTrp 0 Tr oiupq L b. PitK ilarksabalA0 1•wtd^T. R �AldiraraKR • baaal Sa e, • ,_• • I•wwaj•_••►1• • Mot • memo,. SOURCE: Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Adolescent and School Health, YRBSS Participation Maps and History<http:/hvww.cdc.gov/healthyyouth/datalyrbs/participation.htm> Monitoring the Future (MTF) Study: Monitoring The Future is designed to be nationally -represented and not state -represented. MTF does not provide usable estimates for the specific state of Colorado because of the state's relatively small size. Colorado is only 1.6 percent of the total U.S. population; thus, the sampling would only SECTION 2: Youth Marijuana Use Page 152 185 of 669 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The impact Vol. 3/September 2015 be 1.6 percent of Colorado schools (400) or about 6 schools per year. Since 2010, the survey sampled an average of 4.6 Colorado schools. In 2014 and 2015, there were four schools surveyed each year of which three were eighth grade. Therefore, the MTF study is not useful for state data pertaining to Colorado for school -age drug use data and trends.6 Healthy Kids Colorado Survey (HKCS): The Healthy Kids Colorado Survey is voluntary, self -reported health information from Colorado middle and high school students. However, this survey notably changed in 2013. "Sample sizes from 2005-2011 ranged from about 700 to 1,500 students" whereas "sample size for 2013 for current and lifetime use was about 25,000 high school students." Additionally, the HKCS "methodology changed in 2013 to include charter schools and to expand the sample size." Rocky Mountain HIDTA did not feel it was consistent to compare data pre-2013 with the new method of collecting data.' Related Material Denver Public School Marijuana Arrests Increased 39 Percent: Since marijuana was legalized in 2013, Denver Police Department reported 154 arrests in 2013 compared to 111 in 2012 which is a 39 percent increase. Students who talked to 9News from one high school are quoted as saying:8 • "[Legalization] does make it more acceptable because a lot of people couldn't get it before, but now they have uncles or cousins or whatever that are old enough to get it, and they can just get it for them." • Another student saying he sees pot use frequently, "around the parks, walking on the streets, at the bus, in the bus. Everywhere." • Another student saying that students have easier access to the drug than they did before made the comment, "It's Colorado." A student commented, "Yeah, some kids just come to class all stoned." "[Teachers] don't really do nothing. They just look at them. Give them a weird look and then just walk away." School workers say it can be a tough call to report cases like that. Kids suspected of being high that are not disrupting classes, just quietly zoned out at their desk. Valley Schools See Increase in Marijuana -Related Offenses: "Administrators at the Roaring Fork Valley high schools have seen an uptick in marijuana -related infractions over the first full year of the drug being legalized for adult recreational use, causing some changes in the curriculum to better inform students about how pot can adversely affect the teenage brain." School District Superintendent Diana Sirko said in SECTION 2: Youth Marijuana Use Page 153 186 of 669 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 3/September 2015 comparison to the last three to five years there has been a "dramatic increase" in infractions during the recently -completed school year. She states, "I didn't think [legalization] would affect things any more than alcohol does, but we've been more impacted than we first thought. Because of the fact that [marijuana] is now legal, it's viewed differently by kids... It's the availability and overall mindset that leads to problems ."9 School Drug Incidents Raise Questions on Colorado Pot Policy: "Hundreds of Colorado's middle -school students got caught with drugs at school last year, setting a decade -high record while raising questions about the impact of the state's legal marijuana industry." School -based experts believe that the 24 percent increase in middle school drug reports directly relate to the legal marijuana industry. Denver Public Schools saw a 7 percent increase from 452 in school year 2012/13 to 482 in school year 2013/14. "The 951 middle -school drug violations across Colorado was the highest tally in a decade." School officials say that the greater availability and acceptance appears to be prompting more kids to try marijuana. Aurora P.D. School Resource Officer Susan Condreay stated, "I would say that at any given time, any day of the week, there are probably about 10% of the kids in the high school that are under the influence of something."1° Chuck Frank: Study Shatters Claims Marijuana is Harmless: An article in the scientific journal Addiction by Professor Wayne Hall of King's College in London, who is also the World Health Organization drug advisor, "built a compelling case with regard to the negative and adverse effects of cannabis." Among the professor's findings was that regular use, particularly among teens, leads to long-term mental health problems as well as addiction.? • "One in six teenagers who regularly smoke the drug become dependent on it." • Cannabis doubles the risk of developing psychotic disorders, including schizophrenia. • "Cannabis users do worse at school. Heavy use in adolescence appears to impair intellectual development." • "One in ten adults who regularly smoke marijuana become dependent and are more likely to go on to harder drugs." • "Driving after smoking marijuana doubles the risk of car crashes, which increases substantially if the driver also drank alcohol." • "A study released (April 23, 2014) by the Journal of the American Heart Association revealed a relationship between cardiovascular disease and cannabis use in regular marijuana users." SECTION 2: Youth Marijuana Use Page 154 187 of 669 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 3/September 2015 This New Study is Bad News if You're a Marijuana Supporter: Researchers at Northwestern University released a study in the journal Hpppocampus related to some findings regarding heavy use of marijuana on teenagers' long-term memory. The study examined daily marijuana users who began at the age of 16 compared to the same age young adults who never used marijuana. Researchers used an MRI scan of the area of the brain responsible for long-term memory retention. Researchers also conducted MRI scans for subjects in their early 20's who were two years removed from heavy marijuana use. The study showed an "oddly shaped hippocampus" in heavy marijuana users that accompanied long-term memory test scores 18 percent lower than those who had not used marijuana. One of the senior authors stated, "The memory processes that appear to be affected by cannabis are ones that we use every day to solve common problems and to sustain our relationships with friends and family." This apparently was the first study that confirmed the relationship between heavy marijuana use and a misshapen hippocampus that lead to poor long-term memory function.12 Impact of Youth Marijuana Use: A study published in the journal Lancet Psychiatry by Dr. Muiris Houston provides some startling findings concerning marijuana use among youth. • Daily users of marijuana prior to the age of 17 are 60 percent less likely to complete high school or get a university degree than those who do not use marijuana. • Teens who are daily users of marijuana are seven times more likely to attempt suicide. • Teens who use marijuana on a daily basis are eight times more likely to use other drugs later in life.13 Teen. Marijuana Use and the Risk of Psychosis: "Doctors in Germany have noted an alarming rise in psychotic episodes linked to excessive marijuana use among young people, which follows other studies around the world raising alarms." "The number of patients admitted with psychotic episodes after having consumed cannabis has more than tripled in Germany over the last 15 years, from 3,392 in 2000 to 11,708 in 2013." "More than half the patients are younger than 25."14 Pot Smoking Can Damage Developing Brains "Scientists believe that the increased potency leads to abnormalities in the shape, density, and volume of the nucleus accumbens, the walnut -shaped area of the brain that's associated with pleasure and pain. The nucleus accumbens "Is the core of motivation," says study co-author Hans Breiter. J.M. [Gilman et al., Cannabis Use Is Quantitatively Associated with Nucleus Accumbens and Amygdala Abnormalities in Young Adult Recreational Users, Journal of SECTION 2: Youth Marijuana Use Page 155 188 of 669 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Neuroscience (Neurobiology of Disease section), 34 (2014), 5529-5538] brain you do not want to mess around with."75 Vol. 3/September 2015 "This is a part of the Teens That Smoke Pot Could End Up Shorter: "Researchers at a university in Pakistan studied levels of hormones linked to growth and puberty in the blood of 217 boys addicted to marijuana and 220 who didn't smoke at all." They found certain hormones linked to puberty were higher among pot users but growth hormone levels were significantly lower. When checking back years later, the researchers found non - marijuana users were 9 pounds heavier and 4.6 inches taller on average than their marijuana -smoking counterparts. The scientists, who presented their findings at a conference in Ireland, said that this might help provide some insight into the effects of drug use on growth and development.76 Medical Marijuana May Pose Risk to Teens: Study: A study by a professor in the School of Nursing at the University of Michigan showed that teens who legally were using medical marijuana were ten times more likely to say they were addicted than those that got the drugs illegally. The study author, Carol Boyd, stated, "I think that medical marijuana laws are failed policy and that these data lend support to my position."" Study Identifies Teens at Risk for Hashish Use: "The recent increase in popularity of marijuana use coupled with more liberal state -level policies has begun to change the landscape of adolescent marijuana use. More potent forms of marijuana, such as hashish, may present a threat to adolescent health." A study by researchers connected to the New York University Center for Drug Use and HIV Research was one of the first to examine the prevalence and correlation between hash use among a sample of U.S. high school students. One of the researchers reports that one out of ten teens reported using hashish and that marijuana and hashish bear the same risk factors for regular users but are much stronger from hashish, which is a more potent form of marijuana.18 THC Levels in Teens: In a Colorado Springs Gazette Op/Ed dated June 21, 2015 entitled "THC extracts concentrate problems: For example, the average level of THC found in the urine of about 5,000 adolescents ages 12-19 by researchers at the University of Colorado jumped from 358 nanograms per milliliter in 2007 through 2009 - just before the state's boom in medical marijuana dispensaries - to 536 milliliters from 2010 through 2013."19 Pot Unsafe to Teen and Young Adult Brains Under Construction: "Even moderate marijuana use among teens and young people was shown in a study this year to cause abnormalities in the developing brain. Yet as Colorado and other states legalize SECTION 2: Youth Marijuana Use Page 156 189 of 669 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 3/September 2015 recreational pot use, the public perception is that it is generally safe." A study published in the journal of Neuroscience in April 2014, conducted by the Harvard Medical School and Northwestern University Feinberg School of Medicine, used brain scans on young adults who smoked marijuana moderately. The researchers found changes in the volume, shape and density in the regions of the brain responsible for judgment, motivation, decision -making and emotional behavior. They found that the more these young adults smoked, the greater the abnormalities.20 Pot Used to be Pretty Harmless, But It's Plenty Dangerous Today: Dr. Grace M. McGorrian, in a Pittsburgh Post -Gazette editorial, compares the impact of marijuana from the 1960s and '70s to the marijuana of today. She states, "Modern marijuana has been genetically modified to be more potent — six to 10 times higher in THC." The article goes on to describe experience with marijuana users in that they have a greater distortion of reality and consciousness and also sometimes appear to be very sedated and unsteady on their feet. She mentions poor balance and compromised memory even when no longer high. She mentions that she has seen THC levels rise from "200 nanograms per milliliter to 500, to 1,000, to 1,750 (I have seen all these levels.)" Dr. McGorrian also cites that 50 percent of those using high -potency marijuana daily will experience withdrawal symptoms to include poor sleep, decline in appetite, possible vomiting and stomach pain. She cites anxiety, irritability increases and some experience muscle twitching and limb spasms. She says the symptoms will clear in less than a week but the experience is rough and that many heavy users resume smoking mid -withdrawal. Dr. McGorrian is board -certified in adult and forensic psychiatry.21 Under the Influence of Parents: A survey conducted by the Hazelden Betty Ford Foundation's Center for Public Advocacy show that children of parents who have used marijuana are three times more Likely to use it themselves. This nationwide survey was conducted of individuals between the ages of 18 and 25 to get a better understanding of marijuana using habits and attitudes. The survey found that 72 percent of children who reported their parents have used, or are using, marijuana have in fact used it themselves. That compares to less than 20 percent of children whose parents have not used marijuana. The survey also found that 15 percent stated they used marijuana before the age of 14 and about 35 percent between the ages of 14 and 16. The survey also found that the majority of young adult marijuana users (6 out of 10) did not think marijuana was addictive and didn't damage the brain. Almost half of those felt that eating marijuana was safer than smoking it. In Colorado, close to 49 percent of youth surveyed admitted they had used marijuana compared to approximately 41 percent nationwide. In Colorado, 24 percent of youth said they used marijuana daily compared to about 19 percent for the rest of the country.22 SECTION 2: Youth Marijuana Use Page 157 190 of 669 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 3/September 2015 Marijuana Exposure Among Children Younger Than Six Years in the United States: "The rate of exposure to marijuana among young children nationwide is rising. Young children in states where laws allow sale and use of marijuana face significantly elevated risks of exposure and poisoning."23 Sources ' National Survey on Drug Use and Health Model 2013, <http://www.SAMHSA.gov> 2 Tatum, Christine, "Pot plagues Colorado schools," December 2013, <http://drthurstone.corn/pot-plagues-colorado-schools/>, accessed December 2013 School Resource Officer survey by Rocky Mountain HIDTA 4 School Counselor survey by Rocky Mountain HIDTA 5 Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Adolescent and School Health, YRBSS Participation Maps and History, <http://www.cdc.gov/healthvyouth/data/yrbs/participation.htm>, accessed August 2015 <http://www.cdc.gov/healthyyouth/data/yrbsiparticipation.htm>, University of Michigan, Institute for Social Research, Monitoring the Future Study ' University of Colorado Denver, Healthy Kids Colorado Survey, Marijuana Overview of 2013 Data, <http://www.ucdenver. e du/academics/colleges/PublicHe alth/community/CEPEG/UnifY outh/Documents/Marijuana%200verview.pdf>, accessed August 2015 8 Brandon Rittiman, KUSA, December 16, 2014, "DPD revised data on Denver school pot arrests", <http://www.9news.com/story/news/education/2014/12/15/pot-arrests- denver-schools/20459607/>, accessed December 16, 2014 9 Collin Szewczyk, Aspen Daily News Online, June 9, 2015, "Valley schools see increase in marijuana -related offenses, " <http://www.aspendailynews.com/print/166966>, accessed June 9, 2015 SECTION 2: Youth Marijuana Use Page 158 191 of 669 1 1 . The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol, 3/September 2015 1° Katie Kuntz, Rocky Mountain PBS I -News, USAToday.com, February 18, 2015, "School drug incidents raise questions on Colo. pot policy", <http://www.usatoday. com/story/news/nation/2015/02/18/colo-middle-school-drugs- marijuana-violations/23620235/>, accessed February 19, 2015 " Chuck Frank, The Union, April 4, 2015, "Chuck Frank: Study shatters claims marijuana is harmless," <http://www.theunion.com/opinion/columns/15021803- 113/chuck-frank-study-shatters-claims-marijuana-is-harmless>, accessed April 5, 2015 12 Sean Williams, The Motley Fool, April 12, 2015, "This New Study Is Bad News if You're a Marijuana Supporter," <http://www.fool. com/investing/general/2015/04/12/this-new-study-is-bad-news-if- youre-a-marijuana-su.aspx>, accessed April 12, 2015 " Muiris Houston, September 15, 2014, Irishtimes.com, "Medical Matters: The health and social benefits of abstaining from cannabis", <http: //www. irishtimes. com/life-and-style/he alth-family/medical-matters-the-he alth- and-social-benefits-of-abstaining-from-cannabis-1.1924047>, accessed September 16, 2014 14 Freia Peters, Worldcrunch.com, May 3, 2015, "Teen Marijuana Use And The Risks of Psychosis", <http://www.worldcrunch.com/culture-society/teen-marijuana-use-and- the-risks-of-psychosis/drug-health-addiction-cannabis- europe/c3s18633/#.VZ2EcsbJCos>, accessed May 4, 2015 is THE WEEK (Health & Science), Volume 14/Issue 701 December 31, 2014, pg. 9 16 Arden Dier, Newser Staff, newser.cotn, May 19, 2015, "Smoked Pot as a Teen? You Could Have Been Taller," <http://www.newser.corn/story/207051/smoked-pot-as-a- teen-you-could-have-been-taller.html>, accessed May 19, 2015 77 Robert Preidt, WebMD News from HealthDay, July 24, 2014, "Medical Marijuana May Pose Risk to Teens: Study," <http://teens.webmd.com/news/20150724/medical- marijuana-may-pose-risk-to-teens-study-suggests>, accessed July 24, 2015 18 MedicalXpress (as provided by New York University), Apri113, 2015, "Study identifies teens at risk for hashish use," <http://medicalxpress.com/news/2015-04-teens- hashish.html>, accessed April 13, 2015 SECTION 2: Youth Marijuana Use Page 159 192 of 669 ti, The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 3,September 2015 79 Wayne Laugesen and Pula Davis, The Gazette editorial board, June 21 2015, "Clearing the Haze/THC extracts concentrate problems," <http://gazette.com/clearing- the-haze-thc-extracts-concentrate-problems/article/1554097>, accessed June 22, 2015 20 Electra Draper, The Denver Post, December 26, 2014, "A Year of Legal Pot/Pot unsafe for teen and young adult brains under construction," <http: //www. denverpost. com/potanniv ers ary/ci_27174681 /pot-uns afe-teen- and -young - adult -brains -under>, accessed July 14, 2015 21 Dr. Grace M. McGorrian, Pittsburgh Post -Gazette, May 24, 2015, "Pot used to be pretty harmless, but it's plenty dangerous today," <htly://www.post- gazette.corn/opinion/Qp-Ed/2015/05/24/A-tale-oftwo-reefers/stories/201505240065>, accessed May 25, 2015 22 Hazelden Betty Ford Center Foundation, Recovery News, September 18, 2014, "Under the Influence of Parents — Children of marijuana users much more likely to start using marijuana at a young age, new Hazelden Betty Ford Foundation survey finds," <https://www.hazelden.org/web/public/children-of-marijuana-users,page>, accessed September 18, 2014 23 Bridget Anders, BS, et al, "Marijuana Exposure Among Children Younger Than Six Years in the United States," Clinical Pediatrics, June 10, 2015, 1-9 SECTION 2: Youth Marijuana Use Page 160 193 of 669 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 3/September 2015 SECTION 3: Adult Marjuana Use Introduction The following section reviews rates of marijuana use by adults in Colorado and nationally. Data sets examine reported use "within the last 30 days" as opposed to "lifetime" use. Use of the 30-day data provides a more accurate picture and is classified as current use. The lifetime data collection model includes those who were typically infrequent or experimental users of marijuana. Data comparisons are from years 2006 through 2013. The information compares the early medical marijuana era (2006 - 2008), the medical marijuana commercialization and expansion era (2009 - current) and the recreational marijuana era (2013 - current) in Colorado. • 2006 - 2008: There were between 1,000 and 4,800 medical marijuana cardholders and no known dispensaries operating in Colorado. • 2009 - Current: There were over 108,000 medical marijuana cardholders and 532 licensed dispensaries operating in Colorado by the end of 2012. See the introduction at the beginning of this report for more details on the commercialization and explosion of Colorado's medical marijuana trade. • 2013 - Current: In November 2012, Colorado voters passed Constitutional Amendment 64 which legalized marijuana for recreational purposes for anyone over 21 years of age. The amendment also allowed for licensed marijuana retail stores, cultivation operations and edibles manufacturing. SECTION 3: Adult Marijuana Use Page f 61 194 of 669 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 3/September 2015 Some Findings • College Age Adults (ages 18 to 25 years old) Current Marijuana Use 2013 o Colorado average - 29.05 percent o National average -18.91 percent ■ Colorado was ranked 2nd in the nation for current marijuana use among college -age adults (53.62 percent higher than the national average). • In 2006, Colorado was ranked 8th in the nation for current marijuana use among college -age adults. • Between pre- and post -commercialization of medical marijuana, there was a 17 percent increase in college -age (ages 18 to 25 years old) monthly marijuana use. There was an 11 percent increase in just one year after legalization of recreational marijuana in 2013. • There was a 49 percent increase in 18 to 25-year-old probationers testing positive for marijuana since marijuana was legalized for recreational purposes. • Adults (ages 26+ years old) Current Marijuana Use 2013 o Colorado average -10.13 percent o National average - 5.45 percent • Colorado was ranked 5th in the nation for current marijuana use among adults (85.87 percent higher than the national average) • In 2006, Colorado was ranked 8th in the nation for current marijuana use among adults • Between pre- and post -commercialization of medical marijuana, there was a 32 percent increase in adult (26+ years old) monthly marijuana use. There was a 27 percent increase in just one year after legalization of recreational marijuana in 2013. • The top ten states for the highest rate of current marijuana use were all medical - marijuana states. o College age rate (18 to 25 years old): Top ten states average of 26.31 percent compared to national average of 18.91 percent o Adult rate (26+ years old): Top ten states average of 9.28 percent compared to national average of 5.45 percent SECTION 3: Adult Marijuana Use Page 162 195 of 669 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 3/September 2015 • There has been an 87 percent increase in 26+ years old probationers testing positive for marijuana since marijuana was legalized for recreational use. NOTE: SAMSHA RELEASED NATIONAL DATA ON DRUG USE FOR 2014 IN SEPTEMBE.R 2015. HOWEVER, STATE DRUG USE DATA FOR 2014 WILL NOT BE AVAILABLE UNTIL TOWARD THE END OF THE YEAR 2015. Data College Age (18 to 25 Years Old) Average Percent 30.00% 25.00% 20.00% 15.00% 10.00% 5.�00% 0. W% Average Past Month Use of Marijuana College Age (18 to 25 Years Old) 29.0A 2006-2008 2009-2012 2013 (Pre-Commerrialiaation) (Post-Commerdalization) (Legalization) SOURCE: SAMHSA.gov, National Survey on Drug Use and Health, 200E-2013 SECTION 3: Adult Marijuana Use Page 163 196 of 669 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 3/September 2015 Average Percentage College Age (18 to 25 Years Old) Past Month Marijuana Use 25 20 15 10 5 Commercialization Legalization t v 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 ■ National Average , 16.42 16.34 16.45 17.42 18.39 / 18.78 18.89 18.91 • Colorado Average 121.43 22.21 23.44 24.28 1 26.35 27.26 26.81 29.05 SOURCE: SAMHSA.gov, National Survey on Drug Use and Health, 2006 - 2013 Average Percent of Use Prevalence of Past 30-Day Marijuana Use, 18 to 25 Years Old, 2006-2012 35.00% 30.00% 25.00% 20.00% 15.00% 10.00°.4 5.00%1V 0.00% United States Colorado Denver Metro 12006-2008 12008-2010 It 2010-2012 SOURCE: Denver Epidemiology Workgroup (DEWG), Denver Office of Drug Strategy, October 29, 2014 and the National Survey of Drug Use and Health, Sub -state Estimates 2006-2012 SECTION 3: Adult Marijuana Use Page 164 197 of 669 1 VJ The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 3/September 2015 States for Past Month Marijuana Use College Age (18 to 25 Years Old), 20131 Top 10 Bottom 10 (Medical Marijuana States in 2013) (Non -Medical Marijuana States in 2013) National Rate = 18.91% 1, Rhode Island - 29.79% 2. ++Colorado - 29,05°%a 3. Vermont - 28.74% 4. New Hampshire - 27.77% 5. Massachusetts - 26.64% 6. ++Washington - 25.56% 7. Maine - 24.71% 8. Connecticut - 24.41% 9. Oregon - 23.39% 10. Montana - 23.04% ++ Legalized recreational marijuana in 2013 Nu mberPositive 30,000 25,000 20,000 15,000 10,000 5,000 41, Oklahoma -14.43% 42. Arkansas -14.28% 43. Wyoming -14.12% 44. Idaho -14.05% 45. North Dakota -14.04% 46. Alabama -13.93% 47. Texas -13.88% 48. South Dakota -12.68% 49. Kansas-12.23% 50. Utah -10.91 % State of Colorado Probation Number of Positive THC Urinalyses Ages 18 to 25 Years Old ,099 5,987 7,193 Legalization Commercialization 13,125 10,979 16,246 20,019 17,60117,234 I25,606 22,160 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 SOURCE: State of Colorado Judicial Branch, Division of Probation Services SECTION 3: Adult Marijuana Use Page ! 65 198 of 669 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 3/September 2015 Adults (26+ Years Old) Average Percent 12.00% 10.00% 8.00% 6.00% 4.00% 2.00% 0.00% Average Past Month Use of Marijuana Adults (Age 26+ Years Old) (321Talncrease)(27%Increase/ 2013 (Pre -Commercialization) (Post -Commercialization) (Legalization) SOURCE: SAMHSA.gov, National Survey on Drug Use and Health, 2006-2013 Average Percentage 12 10 8 6 4 2 2006-2008 2009-2012 Adult (Age 26+ Years Old) Past Month Marijuana Use Legalization Commercialization 4 U 2 2006 2007 2008 2009 - 2010 2011 2012 2013 ■ National Average 41 4.02 406 4.42 4.68 4.8 5.03 5.45 • Colorado Average 5.32 5.88 6.88 7.31 8.86 8.19 7.63 10.13 SOURCE: SAMHSA.gov, National Survey on Drug Use and Health, 2006-2013 SECTION 3: Adult Marijuana Use Page 166 199 of 669 1 tJ , The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 3/September 2015 Prevalence of Past 30-Day Marijuana Use, 26+ Years Old, 2006-2012 12.00% v 8.00% 6.00% 4.00% 'el 2.00% 10.00% 0.00°Io ■ 2006-2008 • 2008-2010 f 2010-2012 SOURCE: Denver Epidemiology Workgroup (DEWG), Denver Office of Drug Strategy, October 29, 2014 and the National Survey of Drug Use and Health, Sub -state Estimates 2006-2012 States for Past Month Marijuana Use Adults 26 Years Old and Older, 20131 Top 10 bottom 10 (Medical Marijuana States in 2013) (Non -Medical Marijuana States in 2013) National Rate = 5.45% 1. Rhode Island -11.18% 2. Alaska -10.60% 3. ++Washington -10.39% 4. Oregon -10.37% 5. ++Colorado - 10.13% 6. Vermont- 8.88% 7, Montana - 8.44% 8. Maine - 7,95% 9. Michigan - 7.64% 10. New Mexico - 7.23% 41. South Dakota - 3.67% 42. **New Jersey - 3.64% 43. Texas - 3.62% 44. West Virginia -3.57% 45. Kentucky - 3.53% 46. Alabama - 3.41% 47. Louisiana - 3.33% 48. Mississippi - 3.26% 49. North Dakota - 3.26% 50. Kansas - 2.90% ++ Legalized recreational marijuana in 2013 ** First dispensary opened in December 2012 SECTION 3: Adult Marijuana Use Page 167 200 of 669 I V V The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 3/September 2015 NumberPositive 35,000 30,000 25,000 20,000 15,000 10,000 5.000 0 State of Colorado Probation Number of Positive THC Urinalyses Ages 26+ Years Old 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 SOURCE: State of Colorado Judicial Branch, Division of Probation Services Colorado Adult Marijuana Use Demographics2 According to the Colorado Behavior Risk Factor Surveillance System, 2014: • 13.6 percent of adults (18+ years old) are current users of marijuana • Approximately 1 out of 3 current users report using marijuana daily • A little less than 1 in 5 (18.8 percent) report driving after using marijuana • Highest current use demographics: o Younger adults (18 to 24 years old) o Less than high school education o Lower household income o Black o Gay/Lesbian/Bisexual adults o Men • Three highest current use areas in Colorado: o Boulder 18.9 percent o Denver 18.5 percent o Mountain Area West of Denver 15.6 percent SECTION 3: Adult Marijuana Use Page 168 201 of 669 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 3/September 2015 Related Material Marijuana Intoxication Blamed for More Deaths, Injuries: CBS4 Investigates reporter Brian Maass, in May of 2015, did a report on marijuana intoxication and deaths. One case cited was an 18-year-old former outstanding soccer player (Daniel Juarez) who was smoking marijuana with a friend and subsequently told the friend he did not want anymore because he was too high. According to witnesses, he began acting irrationally, running wild, stripping off his clothes and went into an apartment. He then got a knife and stabbed himself 20 times, one of which pierced his heart. The autopsy report showed 38.2 nanograms of THC in his blood at the time of death. The level set for impaired driving by the state of Colorado is 5 nanograms. A second case cited was a University of Wyoming 19-year-old student (Levy Pongi) who was visiting Denver. Apparently he and his friends were ingesting marijuana edibles when the student began acting irrationally by upending furniture, tipping over lamps then rushing out on the hotel balcony and jumping to his death. This student had 7.2 nanograms of THC in his blood at time of death. A third case cited was a wife (Kristine Kirk) who called 911 to report her husband (Richard Kirk) was acting erratically after eating marijuana edibles. While she was on the phone, her husband shot and killed her in front of their three children. The husband's lawyer claimed he was not responsible for his actions due to "involuntary" intoxication. A fourth case cited was a 17-year-old Boulder high school student (Brant Clark) who committed suicide. According to his mother he had consumed a large amount of marijuana at a party and then suffered major psychotic episodes requiring emergency care at two hospitals over a three-day period. Three days later he took his own life leaving behind a note that said, "Sorry for what I have done. I wasn't thinking the night I smoked myself out." This case occurred in 2007 prior to the commercialization of medical marijuana. A fifth case cited was an individual (Tron Doshe) who was returning home from a Colorado Rockies game and had lost his keys. He attempted to climb the outside of the apartment building to reach his balcony when he fell to his death. This death was ruled an accident. The autopsy report showed that this individual had 27.3 nanograms of marijuana in his system, 5 times over Colorado's legal limit and no other drugs were found in his system. The last case cited was a college student (Luke Goodman) who was on a skiing vacation with his family in Keystone, ingested marijuana edibles and subsequently shot himself to death. The autopsy report showed that he had 3.1 nanograms of THC in his system but that family members said he acted extremely irrational after ingesting the edibles. SECTION 3: Adult Marijuana Use Page 169 202 of 669 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact VoI.3/September 2015. Doctor Chris Colwell, chief of Emergency Medicine at Denver Health Medical Center, said, "Since the legalization of marijuana in Colorado, he has seen more and more cases like these of people who have ingested marijuana making poor decisions, decisions they would not otherwise make." He said, "In some cases they will ingest marijuana and behave in a way we would describe as psychotic." Dr. Colwell goes on to state several times each week they see people at the emergency department who have ingested marijuana and are acting suicidal. He states that they have to be restrained to ensure they are not a danger to themselves or other people. Dr. Colwell recalls one example in which a man dressed as Super Man ingested marijuana edibles and then jumped off a balcony as if he could fly. Although the man survived, he suffered several fractures.3 Marijuana Edibles Blamed for Keystone Death: Luke Goodman, a 23-year-old college graduate was on a two -week ski vacation with his family. He and a cousin purchased marijuana edibles and marijuana. They began ingesting the edible marijuana. Apparently Goodman consumed several peach tart candies and several hours later was reported to be jittery, incoherent and talking non -sensibly. His cousin reports that he made eye contact but didn't see them. His cousin described him as "pretty weird and relatively incoherent. It was almost like something else was speaking through him." Apparently the family left the condo and Luke Goodman retrieved a handgun he traveled with and shot himself to death. His cousin and family members referred to him as well -adapted, well -adjusted with no signs of depression or suicidal thoughts. His cousin said that, "He was the happiest guy in the world. He had everything going for him."4,5.6 Hiker Falls to His Death: Twenty-one year old Justin Bondi fell 150 feet to his death while hiking with a friend. According to the friend, on May 3, 2015 they stopped to eat sandwiches while hiking. The friend said that Bondi, "suddenly started shaking" and then fell to his death. The friend later acknowledged to investigators that they had smoked marijuana before embarking on their hike. The autopsy report showed marijuana, a metabolic of cocaine and Xanax. "A 'marijuana drink' and a `metal tool commonly used in association with marijuana' were also found at the scene according to the police report."7 Comedian Takes Too Much of Colorado Marijuana: "Comedian Ralphie May was escorted by police out of his concert venue on Thursday night after he allegedly indulged in too many marijuana -infused edibles and 'lost the plot' on stage." Apparently the 42-year-old entertainer was so high that he struggled to make it onto the stage. While trying to continue, he apparently couldn't put a sentence together, had trouble finishing a joke and constantly lost his place. Obviously the audience was not SECTION 3: Adult Marijuana Use Page 70 203 of 669 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 3/September 2015 happy and demanded refunds. This took place at Avalon Theater in Grand Junction, Colorado.' Colorado Adult Marijuana Use Now Almost Double the National Average: "A new statewide study funded by the Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment found that 13.6% of Colorado adults are regular users of marijuana - almost double the rate (7.4%) of the entire country, according to recent Health and Human Services studies." "Denver is home to the most number of marijuana stores - and leads the state with 18.5% of adults as current users." 9 Marijuana Use Increases in Colorado, According to New Federal Survey: "As marijuana legalization took hold in Colorado, the estimated percentage of regular cannabis users in the state jumped to the second -highest level in the country, according to new federal stats." "Only Rhode Island topped Colorado in the percentage of residents who reported using marijuana as frequently."1° Colorado Partly Blamed as Pot Use Up: "An increasing number of visitors to Yellowstone National Park are being prosecuted for possession of small amounts of medical and recreational pot, which remains illegal on federal land. Park rangers attribute the trend to ignorance of federal law and the growing prevalence of legal pot in other states, including neighboring Colorado, which has legal medical and recreational marijuana. The U.S. attorney's office prosecuted 21 marijuana cases from Yellowstone in 2010 and 52 in 2014. As of December 17th, the office had handled 80 cases in 2014. Those convicted of misdemeanor possession typically receive $1,000 fines."" Study Shows Increased Adult Marijuana Use and Binge Drinking in States That Legalize Medical Marijuana: "Researchers from Emory's [University] Rollins School of Public Health found an increase in adult marijuana use and binge drinking after the implementation of medical marijuana laws (MML) in ten states that permit marijuana use for medical purposes." Dr. Heife Wen, PhD states, "These potential public health consequences may impose considerable economic and social costs on the society."12 Cannabis Smokers Warned They Risk Poorer Exam Grades: "After studying data on more than 54,000 course grades achieved by students from around the world who were enrolled at Maastricht University [Netherlands' before and after the restrictions were introduced, the economists came to a striking conclusion." [Before and after the restrictions were introduced, for certain out -of -country students from buying marijuana.] In a paper presented to the Royal Economic Society conference in Manchester, the economists revealed that those who could no longer legally buy SECTION 3: Adult Marijuana Use Page 171 204 of 669 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 3/September 2015 cannabis did better in their studies. University economist Olivier Marie stated, "The effects we find are large, consistent and statistically very significant." The economist goes on, "In line with how THC consumption affects cognitive functioning, we find that performance gains are larger for courses that require more numerical/mathematical skills."13 Marijuana-Using_Employees: According to Quest Diagnostics: "Drug use costs the U.S. economy billions of dollars annually. According to the 1998 report by the Department of Labor, 73 percent of all current drug users aged 18 and older were employed. This calculates to 6.7 million full-time workers and 1.6 million part-time workers. Marijuana use among employees can lead to lower productivity, increased workplace accidents and injuries, increased absenteeism and lower morale." "According to the U.S. Department of Labor, drug abuse in the workplace costs employers approximately $81 billion each year in lost productivity."14 Drug Tests in the Workforce: "Quest Diagnostics' Drug Testing Index showed that, in 2013, positive drug test results in the workforce for marijuana increased nationwide by 6.2 percent. This is the first increase in positive reported drug tests in a decade. Positive tests for marijuana were dramatically higher in the two states with legal recreational marijuana. The marijuana positivity rates increased 20 percent in Colorado and 23 percent in Washington."75 Sources 1 National Survey on Drug Use and Health (NSDUH), Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration (reports 2006 through 2013) 2 Colorado Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System, "Marijuana Use in Colorado," Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment 3 Brian Maass, CBS4 Investigates, May 18, 2015, "Marijuana Intoxication Blamed In More Deaths, Injuries,"<http://denver.cbslocal.com/2015/05/18/marijuana-intoxication- blamed-in-more-deaths-injuries/>, accessed May 19, 2015 4 Brian Maass, CBS4 Investigates, March 25, 2015, "Marijuana Edibles Blamed For Keystone Death,"<http://denver.cbslocal.com/2015/03/25/marijuana-edibles-blamed- for-keystone-death/>, accessed March 26, 2015 SECTION 3: Adult Marijuana Use Page 172 205 of 669 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol, 31September 2015 From Staff Reports, Tulsa World, March 26, 2015, "Mother of local man who committed suicide says marijuana candy in Colorado led to his death," <http://www, tulsaworld.com/news/local/mother-of-lo cal-man-who-committed-suicide- says-marijuana-candy/article_5f34296b-7bec-5689-90b5-fd677d2dd8e5.html>, accessed March 26, 2015 6 National Families in Action & Partners, The Marijuana Report, May 27, 2015, The Marijuana Report.org/The Marijuana Report, accessed May 28, 2015 ' Mitchel Byars, Daily Camera, August 20, 2015, "Boulder coroner: Man's fall accidental; drugs may have been involved," <http://www. dailycamera.com/news/boulder/ci_28676915/boulder-coroner-mans-fall- accidental-drugs-may-have>, accessed August 21, 2015 S Sophie Jane Evans, Dailymail.com, January 18, 2015, "Police called to comedian Ralphie May's Colorado show after 'he takes too much legal marijuana', forgets his act and causes uproar among the audience," <http://www/dailymail.co.us/news/>, accessed January 18, 2015 9 Smart Approaches to Marijuana (SAM), "Colorado Adult Marijuana Use Now Almost Double the National Average," press release, June 16, 2015 70 John Ingold, The Denver Post, December 26, 2014, "Marijuana use increased in Colorado, according to new federal survey", <http://www. denverpost.com/news/d_27212493/marijuana-use-increased-colorado- according-new-federal-survey>, accessed December 26, 2014 " The Denver Post/Colorado Roundup, Tuesday, January 6, 2015"Yellowstone National Park - Colorado partly blamed as pot use up" 72 Woodruff Health Sciences Center, May 6, 2015, "Emory study shows increased adult marijuana use and binge drinking in states that legalize medical marijuana," <http://www.news.emory. edu/stories/2015/05/legalize_medical_marijuana_abuse/index, html>, accessed May 7, 2015 73 Jamie Doward, The Guardian, April 22, 2015, "Cannabis smokers warned they risk poorer exam grades," <http://www.theguardian.com/society/2015/apr/11/cannabis- smokers-risk-poorer-grades-dutch-study-legalisation>, accessed April 11, 2015 SECTION 3: Adult Marijuana Use Page 173 206 of 669 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 3/September 2015 14 Quest Diagnostics webpage, <http://www.questdiagnostics.com/home/companies/employerJdrug-screening/drugs- tested.html/>, accessed November 29, 2014 15 Institute for Behavior and Health, Inc., "Workplace Drug Testing in the Era of Legal Marijuana, March 2015" SECTION 3: Adult Marijuana Use Page 174 207 of 669 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 3/September 2015 SECTION 4: Emergency Room and Hospital Marijuana -Related Admissions Introduction The following section summarizes emergency room (ER) and hospital data related to marijuana in Colorado. The information, when available, compares the early medical marijuana era (2006 — 2008), the medical marijuana commercialization and expansion era (2009 — current) and the recreational marijuana era (2013 — current) in Colorado. • 2006-2008: There were between 1,000 and 4,800 medical marijuana cardholders and no known dispensaries operating in Colorado. • 2009—Current: There were over 108,000 medical marijuana cardholders and 532 licensed dispensaries operating in Colorado by the end of 2012. See the introduction at the beginning of this report for more details on the commercialization and explosion of Colorado's medical marijuana trade. • 2013—Current: In November 2012, Colorado voters passed Constitutional Amendment 64 which legalized marijuana for recreational purposes for anyone over 21 years of age. The amendment also allowed for licensed marijuana retail stores, cultivation operations and edibles manufacturing. Some Findings • Colorado emergency room visits per year related to marijuana: o 2013 —14,148 0 2014 -18,255 SECTION 4: Emergency Room and Hospital Marijuana -Related Admissions Page 175 208 of 669 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 3/September 2015 • In 2014, when retail marijuana businesses began operating, there was a 29 percent increase in the number of marijuana -related emergency room visits in only one year. • In 2014, when retail marijuana businesses began operating, the rate of emergency department visits likely related to marijuana increased 25 percent in just one year. • Emergency room visits related to marijuana per 100,000 in 2013: o Denver rate - 415.46 o Colorado rate - 248.32 ■ Denver's rate was 67 percent higher than Colorado's rate and increased 25 percent when recreational marijuana was legalized in 2013. • Hospitalizations related to marijuana: o 2011- 6,305 o 2012- 6,715 o 2013 - 8,272 o 2014 -11,439 • In 2014, when retail marijuana businesses began operating, there was a 38 percent increase in the number of marijuana -related hospitalizations in only one year. • In 2014, when retail marijuana stores began operating, the rate of hospitalizations likely related to marijuana increased 20 percent in only one year. • Hospital discharges related to marijuana per 100,000 in 2013: o Denver rate - 245.94 o Colorado rate -148.80 ■ Denver's rate was over 65 percent higher than Colorado's rate and increased 29 percent when recreational marijuana was legalized in 2013. • In the three years after medical marijuana was commercialized, compared to the three years prior, there was a 46 percent increase in hospitalization related to marijuana. SECTION 4: Emergency Room and Hospital Marijuana -Related Admissions Page 176 209 of 669 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 3/September 2015 • Children's Hospital Colorado reported 2 marijuana ingestions among children under 12 years old in 2009 compared to 16 in 2014. Definitions Marijuana -Related: Also referred to as "marijuana mentions." This means the data could be obtained from lab tests, self -admitted or some other form of validation by the physician. That does not necessarily prove marijuana was the cause of the emergency admission or hospitalization. Data Number of Visits Marijuana -Related Emergency Room Visits 20,000 18,000 16,000 14,000 12,000 10,000 8,000 6,000 4,000 2,000 0 2011 2012 2013 2014 SOURCE: Colorado Hospital Association, Emergency Department Visit Dataset. Statistics prepared by the Health Statistics and Evaluation Branch, Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment NOTE: 2011 AND 2012 EMERGENCY DEPARTMENT DATA REFLECTS INCOMPLETE REPORTING STATEWIDE. INFERENCES CONCERNING TRENDS, INCLUDING 2011 AND 2012, SHOULD NOT BE MADE. 2014 FIGURES SHOULD BE ACCURATE, OR CLOSE TO ACCURATE, BUT HAVE NOT YET BEEN FINALLY CONFIRMED. SECTION 4: Emergency Room and Hospital Marijuana -Related Admissions Page 177 210 of 669 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Rates Per 100,000 Vol. 3/September 2015 • Colorado Emergency Department Rates that are Likely Related to Marijuana* 2011 2012 2013 2014 *Rates of Emergency Department (ED) Visits withPossible Marijuana Exposures, Diagnoses, or Billing Codes in the First Three Diagnosis Codes per 100,000 ED Visits by Year in Colorado SOURCE: Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment, Monitoring Health Concerns Related to Marijuana in Colorado: 2014 NOTE: "POSSIBLE MARIJUANA EXPOSURES, DIAGNOSES, OR BILLING CODES IN THE FIRST THREE. DIAGNOSIS CODES: THESE DATA WERE CHOSEN TO REPRESENT THE HD AND ED VISITS WHERE MARIJUANA USE WAS LIKELY A CAUSAL OR STRONG CONTRIBUTING FACTOR TO THE UNDERLYING REASON FOR THE HD AND ED VISIT. THESE DATA CONSISTED OF HD AND ED VISITS CODED WITH DISCHARGE CODES RELATED TO .POISONING BY PSYCHODYSLEPTICS OR SEPARATE CODES RELATED TO CANNABIS ABUSE IN THE FIRST THREE DIAGNOSIS CODES WHICH ARE MORE LIKELY TO BE CLINICALLY SIGNIFICANT CODES." - COLORADO DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC HEALTH AND ENVIRONMENT, MONITORING HEALTH CONCERNS RELATED TO MARIJUANA IN COLORADO: 2014 NOTE: DATA NOT AVAILABLE PRE-2011. SECTION 4: Emergency Room and Hospital Marijuana -Related Admissions Page 178 211 of 669 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 3/September 2015 Rates Per 100,000 Colorado Emergency Department Rates that Could be Related to Marijuana* 2011 2012 2013 2014 *Rates of EmergencyDepartment (ED) Visits with Possible MarijuanaExposwes, Diagnoses, or BiliingCodes per SOURCE: Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment, Monitoring Health Concerns Related to Marijuana in Colorado: 2014 NOTE: "POSSIBLE MARIJUANA EXPOSURES, DIAGNOSES, OR BILLING CODES IN ANY OF LISTED DIAGNOSIS CODES: THESE DATA WERE CHOSEN TO REPRESENT THE HD AND ED VISITS WHERE MARIJUANA COULD BE A CAUSAL, CONTRIBUTING, OR COEXISTING FACTOR NOTED BY THE PHYSICIAN DURING THE HD OR ED VISIT. FOR THESE DATA, MARIJUANA USE IS NOT NECESSARILY RELATED TO THE UNDERLYING REASON FOR THE HD OR ED VISIT. SOMETIMES THESE DATA ARE REFERRED TO AS HD OR ED VISITS WITH ANY MENTION OF MARIJUANA." - COLORADO DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC HEALTH AND ENVIRONMENT, MONITORING HEALTH CONCERNS RELATED TO MARIJlL4NA IN COLORADO: 2014 NOTE: DATA NOT AVAILABLE PRE-2011. SECTION 4: Emergency Room and Hospital Marijuana -Related Admissions Page 179 212 of 669 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 3/September 2015 Emergency Department Rates Per 100,000 Marijuana -Related, 2011-2013 Rates Per 100,000 ■ Colorado 450.00 400.00 350.00 300.00 250.00 200.00 150.00 100.00 50.00 0.00 2011 147.80 2012 179.00 2013 248.32 ■ Denver City and County i 315.34 331.22 415.46 SOURCE: Denver Office of Drug Strategy, The Denver Drug Strategy Commission, Proceedings of the Denver Epidemiology Work Group (DEWG), October 29, 2014 ❖ The highest rates from 2011 to 2013 were among young adults (18 to 25 years). NOTE: 2011 AND 2012 EMERGENCY ROOM DATA DOES NOT REPRESENT COMPLETE, STATEWIDE. PARTICIPATION. INCREASES OBSERVED OVER THESE THREE YEARS MAY BE DUE PARTLY, OR COMPLETELY, TO INCREASES IN REPORTING BY EMERGENCY ROOMS. SECTION 4: Emergency Room and Hospital Marijuana -Related Admissions Page 180 213 of 669 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact 12,000 c 10,000 y . 8,000 Ad x 6, 4,000 E 2,000 Vol. 3/September 2015 Hospitalizations Related to Marijuana _., 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 SOURCE: Colorado Hospital Association, Hospital Discharge Dataset. Statistics prepared by the Health Statistics and Evaluation Branch, Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment Average Hospitalizations 10,000.00 9,000.00 8,000.00 7,000.00 6,000.00 5,000.00 4,000.00 3,000.00 2,000.00 1,000.00 0.00 Average Marijuana -Related Hospitalizations 2006-2008 2009-2012 Pre -Commercialization Post -Commercialization 2013-2014 Legalization SOURCE: Colorado Hospital Association, Hospital Discharge Dataset. Statistics prepared by the Health Statistics and Evaluation Branch, Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment SECTION 4: Emergency Room and Hospital Marijuana -Related Admissions Page 181 214 of 669 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 3/September 2015 Rates Per 100,000 600 400 300 200 100 Colorado Hospitalization Rates that are Likely Related to Marijuana* 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 "Rates of Hospitalization (HD) Visits with Possible Marijuana Exposures, Diagnoses, or Billing Codes in theFirst Three Diagnosis Codes per 100,000 HD Visits by Year in Colorado SOURCE: Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment, Monitoring Health Concerns Related to Marijuana in Colorado: 2014 NOTE: "POSSIBLE MARIJUANA EXPOSURES, DIAGNOSES, OR BILLING CODES IN THE FIRST THREE DIAGNOSIS CODES: THESE DATA WERE CHOSEN TO REPRESENT THE HD AND ED VISITS WHERE MARIJUANA USE WAS LIKELY A CAUSAL OR STRONG CONTRIBUTING FACTOR TO THE UNDERLYING REASON FOR THE HD AND ED VISIT. THESE DATA CONSISTED OF HD AND ED VISITS CODED WITH DISCHARGE CODES RELATED TO POISONING BY PSYCHODYSLEPTICS OR SEPARATE CODES RELATED TO CANNABIS ABUSE IN THE FIRST THREE DIAGNOSIS CODES WHICH ARE MORE LIKELYTO BE CLINICALLY SIGNIFICANT CODES." - COLORADO DEPARTMENT ENT OF PUBLIC HEALTH AND ENVIRONMENT, MON'ITOR/NG HEAT TH CONCERNS RELATED TO MARIJUANA IN COLORADO: 2014 SECTION 4: Emergency Room and Hospital Marijuana -Related Admissions Page 182 215 of 669 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 3/September 2015 Colorado Hospitalization Rates that Could be Related to Marijuana* Rates Per 100,000 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 *Rates of Hospitali 7ation (I -ID) Visits with Possible MarijuanaExposures, Diagnoses, or Billing Codes per 100,000 HD Visits by Year in Colorado SOURCE: Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment, Monitoring Health Concerns Related to Marijuana in Colorado: 2014 NOTE: "POSSIBLE MARIJUANA EXPOSURES, DIAGNOSES, OR BILLING CODES IN ANY OF LISTED DIAGNOSIS CODES: THESE DATA WERE CHOSEN TO REPRESENT THE. HD AND ED VISITS WHERE MARIJUANA COULD BE A CAUSAL, CONTRIBUTING, OR COEXISTING FACTOR NOTED BY THE PHYSICIAN DURING THE HD OR ED VISIT. FOR THESE DATA, MARIJUANA USE IS NOT NECESSARILY RELATED TO THE UNDERLYING REASON FOR THE HD OR ED VISIT. SOMETIMES THESE DATA ARE REFERRED TO AS HD OR ED VISITS `WITH ANY MENTION OF MARIJUANA.' - COLORADO DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC HEALTH AND ENVIRONMENT, MONTTORING HEALTH CONCERNS RELATED TO MARIJUANA LET COLORADO: 2074 SECTION 4: Emergency Room and Hospital Marijuana -Related Admissions Page 183 216 of 669 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 3/September 2015 Rates Per 100,000 Hospital Discharge Rates Per 100,000 Marij uana-Related, 2007-2013 Commerriali7ratiOn Legalization 1 2007—i 2008 ! 2009 T 2010 ' 2011 2012 2013 —+—Denver City and County 129.90 146.76 154.81 ! 201.20 189.08 190.51 245.94 ♦—Colorado 77.15 87.50 j 89.88 114.18 117.48 123.65 148.80 300.00 250.00 200.00 150.00 100.00 50.00 0.00 SOURCE: Denver Office of Drug Strategy, The Denver Drug Strategy Commission, Proceedings of the Denver Epidemiology Work Group (DEWG), October 29, 2014 • The highest rates from 2011 to 2013 were among young adults (18 to 25 years). NOTE: HOSPITAL DISCHARGE DATA REPRESENTS AN INDIVIDUAL'S INPATIENT STAY AT A HOSPITAL REQUIRING, AT MINIMUM, AN OVERNIGHT STAY AND IS IN REFERENCE TO WHEN THE PATIENT LEAVES THE HOSPITAL. A CODE IS ASSIGNED AS TO WHY THE PATIENT WAS IN THE HOSPITAL, CALLED THE ICD-9 CODE, WHICH IS USED FOR BOTH THE PATIENT'S MEDICAL RECORD AND FOR BILLING PURPOSES. SECTION 4: Emergency Room and Hospital Marijuana -Related Admissions Page 184 217 of 669 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 3/September 2015 Nu mber of Children 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 Marijuana Ingestion Among Children Under 12 Years -of -Age 16 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 SOURCE: George Sam Wang, M.D. and Lalit Bajaj, M.D., Children's Hospital Colorado Cost Cost of Emergency Room: A study was conducted of a cross section of ER encounters from 2006 to 2008. The study found that "During our study period, the median charge for outpatient conditions in the emergency room was $1,233,"1 Related Material Cannabis -Related ED Visits Rise in States With Legalized Use: "Cannabis use and abuse have increased significantly during the past few years, especially in states where use of the substance is now legal, new research suggests." A study from the U.S. Healthcare Cost and Utilization Project show that emergency room visits coded for marijuana grew 50.4 percent between 2007 and 2012 in Colorado. This study was presented at the American Academy of Addiction Psychiatry (AAAP) 25th Annual meeting. "Everyone's talking about Colorado, but why aren't they also talking about the states with medical use of marijuana? There appears to be a flaw in the system," lead author Abhishek Rai, MD, from the Department of Psychiatry at St. Mary Mercy SECTION 4: Emergency Room and Hospital Marijuana -Related Admissions Page 185 218 of 669 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 3/September 2015 Hospital in Livonia, Michigan, told Medscape Medical News. "People with access to marijuana are using it and then coming to the ED," added Dr. Rai.' Places With More Marijuana Dispensaries Have More Marijuana -Related Hospitalizations: A press release on August 10, 2015 from the University of Pittsburgh Schools of the Health Sciences released a study to be published in the scientific journal Drug and Alcohol Dependence. The study revealed that, "People who live in areas of California with a higher density of marijuana dispensaries experience a greater number of hospitalizations involving marijuana abuse and dependence."' The Implications of Marijuana Legalization in Colorado: An article in the Journal of the American Medical Association by physicians from the Department of Emergency Medicine University of Colorado discusses the health implications of "marijuana policy liberalization." They write that, "Increased availability lead to increased health care utilization related to marijuana exposure. Exacerbation of chronic health conditions was expected. Tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) is associated with psychosis, anxiety, and depression symptoms, making exacerbation of underlying psychiatric disorders inevitable." The article further states, "However, there has been an increase in visits for pure marijuana intoxication. These were previously a rare occurrence, but even this increase is difficult to quantify. Patients may present to emergency departments (EDs) with anxiety, panic attacks, public intoxication, vomiting, or other nonspecific symptoms precipitated by marijuana use. The University of Colorado ED sees approximately 2000 patients per week; each week, an estimated 1 to 2 patients present solely for marijuana intoxication and another 10 to 15 for marijuana -associated illnesses."4 Five Students at a Denver Middle School Ingest Pot Edibles: A Denver middle school student had sprinkled marijuana on top of "rice crispy treats". Apparently five students ingested the marijuana, some of whom became ill. One of the students was rushed to the hospital at the request of her parents.' 3-Year-Old Rushed to Emergency A 3-year-old was taken to the emergency room after her father told the mother that the child was laying on the couch, seemed tired and not acting normally. At the hospital, the little girl vomited and was subsequently tested positive for marijuana. A search of the couple's residence found nearly 9 ounces of marijuana in a "plastic open top bin" and four marijuana plants growing. Officers also discovered suspected cocaine in the residence.6 SECTION 4: Emergency Room and Hospital Marijuana -Related Admissions Page 186 219 of 669 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 3/September 2015 Burglar Taken to Hospital. Two juveniles were caught burglarizing a marijuana dispensary in Denver. One of the juveniles had to be taken to the hospital because he was so intoxicated.' Sources 1 Caldwell N, Srebotnjak T, Wang T, Hsia R (2013 "How Much Will I get Charged for This?" Patient Charges for Top Ten Diagnoses in the Emergency Department, Plops ONE 8(2): e55491. Doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0055491, accessed January 2015 2 Deborah Brauser, Medscape Medical News from the American Academy of Addiction Psychiatry (AAAP) 25th Annual Meeting, December 16, 2014, "Cannabis - Related ED Visits Rise in States with Legalized Use", <http://www.medscape.cam/viewartide/836663>, XXWAAWS December 16, 2014 University of Pittsburgh, Schools of the Health Sciences Media Relations, press release, August 10, 2015, <http://www.upmc.com/media/NewsReleases/2015/Pages/mair-marijuana. aspx>, accessed August 10, 2015 4 Andrew A. Monte, MD; Richard D. Zane, MD; and Kennon J. Heard, MD, PhD, Department of Emergency Medicine, University of Colorado, Journal of the American Medical Association, December 8, 2014, "The Implications of Marijuana Legalization in Colorado," <http://jama.jamanetwork.com>, accessed December 9, 2014 5 Anthony Cotton, The Denver Post, May 7, 2015, "Denver police: Five students at Skinner Middle School ingest pot edibles; girl cited", <http://www.denverpost.com/news/ci_28070625/denver-police-investigating-reports- that-students-at-middle>, accessed May 7, 2015 6 Alan Gaithright, ABC 7 News Denver, December 17, 2014, "Denver toddler ingests marijuana; parents charged with child abuse, drug possession, DA says," <http://w-ww. thedenverchannel.cam/news/local-news/denver-toddIer-ingests- marijuana-parents-charged-with-child-abuse-drug-possession-da-says>, accessed December 17, 2014 Noelle Phillips, The Denver Post, January 14, 2015, "Two juveniles busted breaking into Denver marijuana dispensary," <http://denverpost.cam/news/ci_27320321/twa- juveniles-busted-breaking-into-denver-marijuana-dispensary>, accessed January 24, 2015 SECTION 4: Emergency Room and Hospital Marijuana -Related Admissions Page 187 220 of 669 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 3/September 2015 THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK SECTION 5: Marijuana -Related Exposure Page 188 221 of 669 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 3/September 2015 SECTION 5: Marijuana -Related Exposure Introduction This section provides information primarily regarding Colorado marijuana -related self -reported calls to the Rocky Mountain Poison and Drug Center (RMPDC), Denver, Colorado. The data comparisons are from 2006 through 2013. The information compares the early medical marijuana era (2006 - 2008), the medical marijuana commercialization/expansion era (2009 - current) and the recreational marijuana era (2013 - current) in Colorado. • 2006 - 2008: There were between 1,000 and 4,800 medical marijuana cardholders and no known dispensaries operating in Colorado. • 2009 - Current: There were over 108,000 medical marijuana cardholders and 532 licensed dispensaries operating in Colorado by the end of 2012. See the introduction at the beginning of this report for more details on the commercialization and explosion of Colorado's medical marijuana trade. • 2013 - Current: In November 2012, Colorado voters passed Constitutional Amendment 64 which legalized marijuana for recreational purposes for anyone over 21 years of age. The amendment also allowed for licensed marijuana retail stores, cultivation operations and edibles manufacturing. Some Findings • In 2014, when retail marijuana businesses began operating, marijuana -only related exposures increased 72 percent in only one year. SECTION 5: Marijuana —Related Exposure Page 189 222 of 669 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 3/Septeinber 2015 • In the years medical marijuana was commercialized (2009 - 2012), marijuana - related exposures averaged a 42 percent increase from prior years (2001 - 2008) average. • All ages Colorado marijuana -related exposures: c During the years 2013 - 2014, the average number of all ages exposures was 175 per year. ■ Exposures for all ages doubled in Colorado after legalization. • Youth (ages 6 to 17 years old) marijuana -related exposures in Colorado: c During the years 2013 - 2014, the average number of children exposed was 45 per year. ■ This is an 80 percent increase from medical marijuana commercialization years (2009 - 2012) average which was a 67 percent higher increase over previous years (2006 - 2008) averages. • Young children (ages 0 to 5 years old) marijuana -related exposures in Colorado: o During the years 2013 - 2014, the average number of children exposed was 31 per year. ■ This is a 138 percent increase from the medical marijuana commercialization years (2009 - 2012) average which was a 225 percent increase from prior years (2006 - 2008). • Percent of total marijuana -related exposures involving children ages 0 to 5 years old: o During 2013 - 2014, a yearly average of 17.71 percent ■ This is about triple the national average of 5.95 percent SECTION 5: Marijuana -Related Exposure Page 190 223 of 669 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 3/September 2015 Data Average Nu mber 180 160 140 120 100 80 60 40 20 0 All Ages, Average Number of Marijuana -Related Exposures 2006-2008 2009-2012 Pre -Commercialization Post-Coninerriaiization SOURCE: Rocky Mountain Poison and Drug Center 160 140 0 4°', 120 100 10 0 80 0 60 0 z 40 20 0 2013-2014 Legalization Number of Exposures Reported for Marijuana Only 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 SOURCE: Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment, Monitoring Health Concerns Related to Marijuana in Colorado: 2014 via Rocky Mountain Poison and Drug Center SECTION 5: Marijuana -Related Exposure Page 191 224 of 669 1 IIL The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 3/September 2015 ti a 250 w 200 150 z 100 50 Number of Marijuana -Related Exposures, by Age Range 0-5yrs 6-12vrs 208 13-14yrs 15-17yrs 18-25yrs 26+ yrs Age Range SOURCE Rocky Mountain Poison and Drug Center Average Number 40 35 30 25 20 15 10 5 Youth Ages 6 to 17 Years Old, Average Number of Marij uana-Related Exposures 2006-2008 Pre-Cornmerri a1i 7ation 2009-2012 Post -Commercialization SOURCE: Rocky Mountain Poison and Drug Center 2013-2014 Legalization ■ 2005-2009 ■ 2010-2014 SECTION 5: Marijuana -Related Exposure Page 192 225 of 669 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Average Number Vol. 3/September 2015 Children Ages 0 to 5 Years Old, Average Number of Marijuana -Related Exposures 2006-2008 2004-2012 Pre -Commercialization Post- Commercialization SOURCE: Rocky Mountain Poison and Drug Center 40 35 24 30 25 W 20 it 15 F 10 5 2013-2014 Legalization Marijuana -Related Exposures Children Ages 0 to 5 Years Old 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 SOURCE: Rocky Mountain Poison and Drug Center SECTION 5: Marijuana —Related. Exposure Page 193 226 of 669 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 3/September 2015 Average Percent 18.00% 16.00% 14.00% 12.00% 10.00% 8.00% 6.00%a 4.00% 2.00% 0.00% Average Percent of All Marijuana -Related Exposures, Ages 0 to 5 Years Old 2009-2012 ■ National [ Colorado SOURCE: Rocky Mountain Poison and Drug Center 2006-2008 Related Material 2013.2014 Pot -related Calls to Colorado, Washington Poison Centers Up: In a Denver Post article dated January 25, 2015 by Gene Johnson of the Associated Press, it cites the substantial increase in calls to poison control centers related to marijuana. "The spike in numbers since marijuana was legalized includes a troubling jump in cases involving young kids." Calls to the Colorado poison center in 2014 almost doubled the number of calls in 2013 and tripled the calls in 2012. Calls to the Washington poison center jumped about 50 percent from 2013 to 2014. Calls involving children nearly doubled in both states.' Child Marijuana Poisoning Incidents Increase After States Legalize Pot: A study by researchers at the Nationwide Children's Hospital report, "More young children are exposed to marijuana in states after the drug had become legal for medical or recreational use..." This study, in the journal Clinical Pediatrics found: "the rate of marijuana exposures among children 5 years old and under increased 16 percent each SECTION 5: Marijuana —Related Exposure Page 194 227 of 669 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol.:31September 2015 year after legalization in those states." According to the National Poison Database System, child exposures increased 147 percent from 2006- 2013.2 Children and THC-Infused Edibles: According to a Colorado Springs Gazette Op/Ed dated June 21, 2015, entitled "THC extracts concentrate problems": "In Colorado, the number of exposures to THC-infused edibles in your children increased fourfold in one year, from 19 cases in 2013 to 95 in 2014, according to the Rocky Mountain Poison and Drug Center. "3 Sources 1 Gene Johnson, the Associated Press/Denver Post, January 25, 2015, "Pot -related calls to Colo., Wash. poison centers up" 2 Jackie Borchardt, Northeast Ohio Media Group, June 16, 2015, "Child marijuana poisoning incidents increase after states legalize pot," <http://www. cleveland.com/open/index. ssf/2015/06/child_poisoning_cases_increas e. ht ml%23incart_river>, accessed June 17, 2015 3 Wayne Laugesen and Pula Davis, The Gazette editorial board, June 21 2015, "Clearing the Haze/THC extracts concentrate problems," <http://gazette.com/clearing- the-haze-thc-extracts-concentrate-problems/article/1554097>, accessed June 22, 2015 SECTION 5: Marijuana —Related Exposure Page 19 228 of 669 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 3/September 2015 THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK SECTION 5: Marijuana —Related Exposure Page 196 229 of 669 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol..3/September 2015 SECTION 6: Treatment Introduction This section examines whether Colorado's legalized medical marijuana industry and the recent legalization of marijuana for recreational use has affected the admission rate to substance abuse treatment programs. The information compares the early medical marijuana era (2006 - 2008), the medical marijuana commercialization and expansion era (2009 - current) and the recreational marijuana era (2013 - current) in Colorado. • 2006-2008: There were between 1,000 and 4,800 medical marijuana cardholders and no known dispensaries operating in Colorado. • 2009-Current: There were over 108,000 medical marijuana cardholders and 532 licensed dispensaries operating in Colorado by the end of 2012. See the introduction at the beginning of this report for more details on the commercialization and explosion of Colorado's medical marijuana trade. • 2013-Current: In November 2012, Colorado voters passed Constitutional Amendment 64 which legalized marijuana for recreational purposes for anyone over 21 years of age. The amendment also allowed for licensed marijuana retail stores, cultivation operations and edibles manufacturing. Some Findings • Marijuana treatment data from Colorado in years 2005 - 2014 does not appear to demonstrate a definitive trend. Colorado averages approximately 6,500 treatment admissions annually for marijuana abuse. • Over the last ten years, the top three drugs involved in treatment admissions, in descending order, were alcohol (average 12,943), marijuana (average 6,491) and methamphetamine (average 5,044). SECTION 6: Treatment Page 197 230 of 669 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol, 3/September 2015 Data Number of Admissions 8,000 7,000 6,000 5,000 4,000 3,000 2,000 1,000 Treatment with Marijuana as Primary Substance of Abuse, All Ages 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 SOURCE: Center for Behavioral Health Statistics and Quality, Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration, Treatment Episode Data Set (TEDS) based on administrative data reported by states to TEDS through April 03, 2013 SECTION 6: Treatment Page 198 231 of 669 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 3/September 2015 Nu mbrrof Admissions --Alcohol Drug Type for Treatment Admissions All Ages 16,000 - - . - - 14,000 12,000 1-- 10,000 8,000 I�- ilk 6,000 ♦ -Maujuana -6-Cocaine 4,000 A 4 2,000 ° r2006 2006 2007 200s 2009 , 2010 10,168 111,721 12,094 113,385 13, 8661 13,284 5,568 1 5,711 6,144 6,906 7,085 ' 6,924 2936 3,485 3,464 3,691 13)036 ; 2,519 2011 1 2012 2013 13,414 114,811 1 13, 908 12,783 6,688 17,052 6,817 6,011 2,375 12,283 1,755 1,526 - -Methamphetamine 5,087 5,071 5,117 4,945 1,556 1 4,446 4,366 1 4,990 15677 --I-Herrin 1, 6 ! 1,380 i 1,353 11,499 1,730 ! 1,786 2227 12,732 1 3,183 -6-Prescription72 892 1 1,029 i 1,293 11537 1,738 1,937 12340 2,266 --►--Other1. 329 355 426 I 530 1 537 1 519 817 1 821 743 6,186 3,995 2,076 576 SOURCE: Colorado Department of Human Services, Office of Behavioral Health, 2005 - 2014 c Percent of Admi 6or 5o 40 30 20 10 1- Percent of Marijuana Treatment Admissions by Age Group 2006 ' 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 -4-12-171 31.2 28.2 28.3 28.7 29 27.7 24.1 22.4 19.8 --tom 18-20 13 13.3 13 14 12.9 11.9 12.1 11.2 9.4 20 I 202 19.6 20.2 20.E 19.9 20.5 20.9 22A -a-21-25 35.8 I 38.3 39.1 37.1 37.6 40.5 43.3 45.6 48.4 -40-26+ SOURCE: Center for Behavioral Health Statistics and Quality, Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration, Treatment Episode Data Set (TEDS) based on administrative data reported by states to TEDS through April 3, 2015 SECTION 6: Treatment Page 199 232 of 669 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 3/September 2015 Numbero( Admissions 1,600 Marijuana Treatment Admissions Based on Criminal Justice Referrals 1,400 1,202 1,200 H. • 1,000 800 821 600 I- I 400 805 —1,292 1,204 1,204 660 826 1,446 1,347 1,309 1,327�\ 1.306 988 1,030 999 1,054 200 1- 0 791 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 -4-Ages 17 and Under - I -Ages 18-25 SOURCE: Colorado Department of Health Services, Office of Behavioral Health, 2005 - 2014 NOTE: DATA FROM THE COLORADO OFFICE. OF BEHAVIORAL HEALTH IN YEARS 2011 THROUGH 2013 SHOWS THAT APPROXIMATELY 70 PERCENT OF MARIJUANA TREATMENT ADMISSIONS FOR THOSE OVER 18 YEARS OF AGE WERE REFERRALS FROM CRIMINAL JUSTICE AND 30 PERCENT WERE CLASSIFIED AS VOLUNTARY) THIS IS LIKELY A CONTRIBUTING FACTOR FOR THE DROP IN ADMISSIONS FOR MARIJUANA ABUSE. "We have noticed that those presenting with Cannabis Use Disorder are more committed to their use and harder to get through to than in years past. Patients tell us regularly that they will give up other drugs/alcohol but not marijuana and remind us of its legal status. This logic would obviously hold no water with alcohol and is a disturbing trend given that patients telling us this are often in dire straits. Their use/addiction has had and is having extremely detrimental effects on their lives yet they tell us it can't be an issue because marijuana is "legal and non-addictive."2 Sources 1 Colorado Department of Human Services, Office of Behavioral Health, 2005 — 2014 Clinical Director Michael Barnes, PhD, LMFT, Business Development/Community Liaison, CeDAR/University of Colorado Hospital, September 2015 SECTION 6: Treatment Page 1100 233 of 669 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 3/September 2015 SECTION 7: Diversion of Colorado Marijuana Introduction This section examines whether Colorado legalizing medical and recreational marijuana has established Colorado as a marijuana source state for other parts of the country. There is no mandatory process for law enforcement to report either the seizure or the source of the marijuana. Rocky Mountain High Intensity Drug Trafficking Area (RMHIDTA) contacted some law enforcement entities and requested voluntary reporting of those instances in which Colorado marijuana was seized in their jurisdiction. Only those cases that were completed and are a matter of public record were used in this report. Open or long-term major investigations involving marijuana trafficking from Colorado have been excluded. This section includes: • Interdictions resulting in seizure of marijuana from Colorado • Investigations resulting in seizure of marijuana from Colorado • Cases involving youth trafficking The information compares the early medical marijuana era (2006 - 2008), the medical marijuana commercialization and expansion era (2009 - current) and the recreational marijuana era (2013 - current) in Colorado. • 2006 - 2008: There were between 1,000 and 4,800 medical marijuana cardholders and no known dispensaries operating in Colorado. • 2009 - Current: There were over 108,000 medical marijuana cardholders and 532 licensed dispensaries operating in Colorado by the end of 2012. See the introduction at the beginning of this report for more details on the commercialization and explosion of Colorado's medical marijuana trade. SECTION 7: Diversion of Colorado Marijuana Page 1101 234 of 669 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 3.iSeptember 2015 • 2013 - Current: In November 2012, Colorado voters passed Constitutional Amendment 64 which legalized marijuana for recreational purposes for anyone over 21 years of age. The amendment also allowed for licensed marijuana retail stores, cultivation operations and edibles manufacturing. Definitions Colorado Marijuana Interdiction Seizures: Incidents where highway or state patrols stopped a driver for a traffic violation and subsequently found Colorado marijuana destined for other parts of the country. These interdiction seizures are reported on a voluntary basis to the National Seizure System (NSS) managed by the El Paso Intelligence Center (EPIC). These are random traffic stops, not investigations, and does not include local law enforcement data. Some Findings • During 2009 - 2012, when medical marijuana was commercialized, the yearly average number interdiction seizures of Colorado marijuana increased 365 percent from 52 to 242 per year. • During 2013 - 2014, when recreational marijuana was legalized, the yearly average interdiction seizures of Colorado marijuana increased another 34 percent from 242 to 324. • In 2014, there were 360 interdiction seizures of Colorado marijuana destined for other states. When compared to the pre -commercialization average of 52 from 2005 - 2008, this represents a 592 percent increase. • The total average number of pounds of Colorado marijuana seized from 2005 - 2008 compared to 2009 - 2014 increased 33 percent from 2,763 pounds to 3,671 pounds. • Of the 360 seizures in 2014, there were 36 different states destined to receive marijuana from Colorado. The most common destinations identified were Kansas, Missouri, Illinois, Oklahoma and Florida. SECTION 7: Diversion of Colorado Marijuana Page 1102 235 of 669 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 31September 2015 • The top county identified as the source for the marijuana in 2014 was Denver with 63 percent. Data NOTE: THE BELOW CHARTS ONLY INCLUDE CASES WHERE COLORADO MARIJUANA WAS ACTUALLY SEIZED AND REPORTED. IT IS UNKNOWN HOW MANY COLORADO MARIJUANA LOADS WERE NOT DETECTED OR, IF SEIZED, WERE NOT REPORTED. + A 2014 survey of approximately 100 interdiction experts estimates they seize 10 percent or less of what gets through undetected. N umber of Seizu res 400 -, Colorado Marijuana Interdiction Seizures 350 300 �--- 250 -- -- 200 150 100 50 0 Commerria iTaiio 92 321 288 Legalization 360 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 SOURCE: El Paso Intelligence Center, National Seizure System, as of March 20, 2015 SECTION 7: Diversion of Colorado Marijuana Page 1103 236 of 669 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Average Nu tuber of Pounds 4,003 3,500 3,000 2500 2000 1,500 1,000 500 0 Vol. 3/September 2015 Average Pounds of Colorado Marijuana from Interdiction Seizures 2005-2008 Pre -Commercialization 2009-2014 Post -Commercialization SOURCE: El Paso Intelligence Center, National Seizure System, as of March 20, 2015 Rocky Mountain HIDTA expects the total weight of marijuana seized in the future will likely decrease due to: • More marijuana loads with high THC content and lower weight "buds" as opposed to lower THC content and higher weight bulk. • The increased popularity of hash and hash oil which are high THC, high price and low weight. • Smaller loads with less weight are easier to conceal and more difficult to detect. SECTION 7: Diversion of Colorado Marijuana Page 1 104 237 of 669 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol, 3/September 2015 States to Which Colorado Marijuana Was Destined (2014) (Total Reported Incidents per State) Nrwaa 2 Wand eximodo NS* A4xiam Zia i,wa 6 04. AA.... 1-7 'jrisho..t . I 19 �, 9,, \ `mow 2 ' �� +� 5�1 3 \ Grape',, / \ 41, is r4y,- ,..,Z Oklatuvu Tektot SOURCE: El Paso Intelligence Center, National Seizure System, as of March 20, 2015 + 21 seizures with undisclosed destination states Top Three Cities for Marijuana Origin ArkOcean eaSM WA. Originating City Rank Number of Seizures from Originating City Percentage 1, 2. Denver Yuma Colorado Springs A Few Examples of Interdictions 227 20 14 63.06% 5.56% 3,89% Wyoming Highway Patrol Busy with Colorado Marijuana: The Wyoming Highway Patrol reported that, in the first quarter of 2015, 30 percent of their highway SECTION 7: Diversion of Colorado Marijuana Page 1105 238 of 669 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 3/September 2015 interdiction seizures involved people traveling to Colorado specifically for the purpose of purchasing and transporting marijuana and THC products to locations outside of Colorado. In one case in March, a highway patrol trooper stopped a vehicle for traffic violations. The officer subsequently found that the driver had failure -to -appear warrants for traffic offenses out of Wyoming and did not have a valid drivers' license. Subsequent to the arrest, officers found close to 5 ounces of high-grade marijuana. The driver told the officer that he had purchased the marijuana from a dispensary in the Steamboat Springs area of Colorado. Georgia Dealer Moves to Colorado for Marijuana Supply: On June 4, 2014, a Mississippi Highway Patrol trooper stopped a vehicle with Georgia plates for a traffic violation. As a result of the traffic stop, the trooper seized 5 pounds of marijuana from Denver, Colorado en route to Atlanta, Georgia. Apparently a Georgia resident moved to Denver so he could qualify for and use Colorado's legalization status to obtain and ship marijuana back to Georgia. The marijuana was referred to as "legal mile -high weed." Scottsbluff, Nebraska Resident Frequents Colorado Dispensaries: On December 20, 2014, a Scottsbluff (Nebraska) Police Department officer stopped a vehicle for a traffic violation. The vehicle was being driven by a female but the vehicle was registered to her boyfriend, both from Scottsbluff. Pursuant to the stop the officer found numerous items of marijuana literature from dispensaries in Denver and containers of marijuana bottles from dispensaries. The female told the officer that her boyfriend frequents marijuana dispensaries. The search further revealed numerous concealment locations in the vehicle. While the officer was conducting the search, the boyfriend arrived and advised the officer that anything found in the vehicle belonged to him. "Old Stuff" (Colorado Marijuana) to Mom's House: On December 17, 2014, a Shawnee County Sheriff's Office deputy stopped a rental vehicle registered in Missouri. The driver, from Denver, Colorado, was en route to Parkville, Missouri allegedly with boxes of "old stuff" to be taken to his mother's house. During this traffic stop the officer found THC butter, 3.9 pounds of high-grade marijuana in 17 different containers, labels from a Colorado dispensary as well as equipment and butane for setting up a marijuana extraction lab. Medical Marijuana Items from Colorado: On January 28, 2015, a South Dakota Highway Patrol officer stopped a vehicle registered in Minnesota for a traffic violation. During the search of the vehicle, the officer found 1 pound of marijuana, lfi pound of SECTION 7: Diversion of Colorado Marijuana Page 1 106 239 of 669 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 3/September 2015 butane hash oil and 4 pounds of marijuana edibles. According to the officer, almost all of it was medical marijuana items from Colorado. Candy and Gummy Bears from Colorado to Florida: On September 8, 2014, Louisiana law enforcement stopped a rental vehicle for a traffic violation. The vehicle, traveling from Colorado to Tallahassee, Florida, was subsequently searched. The officer found approximately 10 pounds of high-grade marijuana and assorted marijuana edibles, including 3 bottles of sour gummy bears, "Monkey Bar", "Boulder Bar" and "Cookies and Cream." Marijuana Plants and Edibles: In March of 2015, a Kansas Highway Patrol trooper stopped a vehicle, registered in Wisconsin, for a traffic violation. Subsequent to the stop the trooper searched the vehicle and found 4 pounds of marijuana, 44 marijuana plants, 2 tubs of marijuana edibles and 3 marijuana candy bars in the vehicle. The vehicle was coming from Denver, Colorado en route to Wisconsin. Colorado Marijuana and Candy to Montana: On July 27, 2014, a Wyoming Highway Patrol trooper stopped a vehicle with Tennessee plates coming from Denver, Colorado en route to Montana. As a result of the traffic stop the trooper seized over 11 ounces of high-grade marijuana, 1 THC lollipop and 2 THC candies. The driver claimed he was going to Montana to fly fish although there was no fly fishing gear in the vehicle. Over 14 Pounds of Marijuana and Half a Pound of THC Wax: On March 14, 2015, a South Dakota Highway Patrol trooper stopped a vehicle registered in Minnesota for a traffic violation. A subsequent search revealed close to 15 pounds of marijuana and over half a pound of THC wax concealed in a suitcase and bag in the trunk of the vehicle. The vehicle was coming from Denver, Colorado en route to Rapid City, South Dakota. 120 Pounds and Edibles: In December of 2014, Kansas Highway Patrol troopers stopped a vehicle registered in Georgia for a traffic violation. Subsequent to the stop, the trooper discovered 120 pounds of marijuana and a half pound of marijuana edibles inside the vehicle. The vehicle was coming from Denver, Colorado en route to Missouri. Marijuana and Edibles Destined for Lincoln, Nebraska: On April 4, 2015, a Colorado State Patrol trooper stopped a rental vehicle for a traffic violation. During the stop, the trooper discovered 30 pounds of marijuana and 3,200 milligrams of marijuana SECTION 7: Diversion of Colorado Marijuana Page 1107 240 of 669 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 3/September 2015 edibles concealed in a suitcase and duffel bag in the trunk. The vehicle was headed to Lincoln, Nebraska from Denver, Colorado. U-Haul with Marijuana: In July of 2014, a Kansas Highway Patrol trooper stopped a vehicle towing a U-Haul trailer for traffic violations. During the traffic stop, the vehicle was searched and 67 pounds of marijuana, along with 17 pounds of marijuana edibles, were found inside the vehicle. The vehicle was coming from Denver, Colorado en route to Missouri. Colorado to Minnesota: On January 24, 2015, a South Dakota Highway Patrol trooper stopped a vehicle registered in Minnesota for a traffic violation. A subsequent search revealed 3 pounds of marijuana and 44 grams of THC wax as well as a loaded 9 mm handgun. This vehicle was coming from Fort Collins, Colorado en route to Minnesota. Colorado Marijuana to Virginia: On April 6, 2015, a Nebraska State Patrol trooper stopped a vehicle registered in Virginia for a traffic violation. A subsequent search revealed over 7 pounds of marijuana as well as marijuana edibles concealed inside a suitcase in the trunk of the vehicle and backpacks throughout the vehicle. The vehicle was coming from Colorado en route to Virginia. 168 Pounds Seized in South Carolina Two individuals from Colorado were arrested in Cherokee County, South Carolina after a traffic stop revealed approximately 168 pounds of marijuana. According to arresting officers, the marijuana was destined for Charlotte, North Carolina and worth approximately $900,000.' Troopers Seize 33 Pounds of Pot: In November, 2014, Texas Department of Public Safety troopers seized 33 pounds of marijuana during a traffic stop. The two occupants of the vehicle who were arrested had just come from Colorado and were suspected of transporting the marijuana back to Ashville, North Carolina.2 34 Pounds Found in Pennsylvania Rental Vehicle: On January 11, 2015, a Nebraska State Patrol trooper stopped a vehicle for a traffic violation. This rental vehicle, registered out of Pennsylvania, was coming from Colorado en route to Mason City, Iowa. The trooper subsequently discovered 34 pounds of marijuana concealed inside two duffel bags in the trunk of the vehicle. 242 Pounds of Marijuana Seized: On April 11, 2014, a Nebraska State Patrol trooper stopped a vehicle for a traffic violation. A subsequent search revealed 242 SECTION 7: Diversion of Colorado Marijuana Page 1108 241 of 669 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 3/September 2015 pounds of marijuana found under the bed of the truck. The vehicle was coming from Denver, Colorado en route to Rochester, New York. 53 Pounds Destined for Wisconsin: On February 19, 2015, a South Dakota Highway Patrol trooper stopped a vehicle registered in Wisconsin. A subsequent search of the vehicle revealed 53 pounds of marijuana concealed in the trunk. This vehicle was coming from Colorado en route to Wisconsin. 10 Pounds Destined for Cedar Falls, Iowa: On October 20, 2014, an Iowa State Patrol trooper stopped a vehicle for a traffic violation. The trooper subsequently discovered 10 pounds of marijuana concealed inside two bags in the back seat of this pick-up truck. The driver came from Aurora, Colorado and was en route to Cedar Falls, Iowa. 5 Pounds Destined for College Town: On December 13, 2014, an Iowa State Patrol trooper stopped a vehicle for a traffic violation. The trooper subsequently discovered 5 pounds of marijuana concealed inside the inner lining of a suitcase that was located in the trunk of the vehicle. The vehicle was coming from Denver, CO en route to Ann Arbor, Michigan. New Jersey Rental Transporting Marijuana to Minnesota: On March 6, 2015, an Iowa State Patrol trooper stopped a vehicle for a traffic violation. A subsequent search revealed 6 pounds of marijuana concealed inside the spare tire area of the trunk of the vehicle. The rental vehicle, registered in New Jersey, was coming from Colorado en route to Twin Cities, Minnesota. Yuma, Colorado to Boston, Massachusetts: On March 8, 2014, an Ohio Highway Patrol trooper stopped a vehicle for traffic violations. During the stop, the trooper seized over 45 kilograms of marijuana. The vehicle was coming from Yuma, CO en route to Boston, Massachusetts. 55 Pounds to Columbia, Missouri: On October 25, 2014, Missouri Highway Patrol troopers pulled over a vehicle for traffic violations. During the stop, a subsequent search was conducted and the troopers discovered 55 pounds of marijuana. The vehicle, registered in Texas, was coming from Yuma, CO en route to Columbia, Missouri. SECTION 7: Diversion of Colorado Marijuana Page 1109 242 of 669 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 3/September 2015 Illinois Stops Marijuana Destined for Ohio: On October 23, 2014, Illinois State Police stopped a vehicle traveling from Denver, Colorado to Akron, Ohio. During the traffic stop officers, assisted by a K9, seized 8 pounds of high-grade marijuana vacuum - sealed and placed in two duffel bags in the trunk. 36 Pounds Destined for Florida: In January of 2015, a Kansas Highway Patrol trooper stopped a vehicle for traffic violations. Subsequent to the stop, the trooper discovered 36 pounds of high-grade marijuana inside the vehicle. This vehicle, registered in Florida, was coming from Denver, Colorado en route to Florida. Marijuana to Kentucky: In April of 2015, a Kansas Highway Patrol trooper stopped a vehicle with Texas registration for a traffic violation. A subsequent search of the vehicle revealed 24 pounds of marijuana concealed inside the vehicle. The vehicle was coming from Denver, Colorado en route to Kentucky. Marijuana to New Mexico: On September 4, 2014, a Colorado State Patrol trooper stopped a vehicle registered in New Mexico for a traffic violation. During the stop the trooper discovered 32 pounds of marijuana in a duffel bag in the trunk of the car. The vehicle was coming from Denver, Colorado en route to Roswell, New Mexico. 38 Pounds to Sioux Falls, South Dakota: On September 18, 2014, a Colorado State Patrol trooper stopped a vehicle for traffic violations. During the stop, the trooper discovered 38 pounds of marijuana in brand new Luggage that was purchased in Denver specifically for the purpose of storing the marijuana in the trunk. The vehicle was coming from Denver en route to Sioux Falls, South Dakota. Trick or Treat Bag with Marijuana: On November 1, 2014, a Wyoming Highway Patrol trooper stopped a vehicle for speeding. When asked, the driver admitted she did not have registration for the vehicle and that she was coming from Colorado en route to Wamsutter, Wyoming. The trooper subsequently found eight plastic bags containing over 7 ounces of high-grade marijuana that were concealed in a plastic trick or treat bag. Colorado Marijuana to North Dakota: On December 5, 2014, a Colorado State Patrol trooper stopped a vehicle for a traffic violation. The vehicle was coming from Denver, Colorado en route to Grand Forks, North Dakota. During the stop, the trooper seized 15 pounds of marijuana wrapped in a vacuum -sealed container found in a suitcase and duffel bag in the trunk. SECTION 7: Diversion of Colorado Marijuana Page 1 110 243 of 669 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact VoI. 3/September 2015 A Few Examples of Investigations NOTE: THE EXAMPLES BELOW ARE ONLY A SMALL SAMPLE OF THE MANY INVESTIGATIONS INVOLVING COLORADO MARIJUANA CITED BY VARIOUS DRUG UNITS. Colorado "Medical" Marijuana Sold in Springfield, Missouri: Based on a tip, Springfield (Missouri) P.D. officers secured a search warrant on the home of a drug dealer. Pursuant to the warrant, officers seized half a pound of marijuana, $2,000 in cash and nine weapons. Records show that one of the suspects had removed some of the contraband from the residence prior to police executing the warrant. They also seized items consistent with a THC extraction lab. Both suspects face charges of possession with intent to distribute a controlled substance. According to the news article: "A pair of Springfield men have been arrested and accused of collecting medical marijuana in Colorado and selling it in southwest Missouri."' Caregiver and 425 Pounds of Colorado Marijuana in Nashville: Two Breckenridge residents were arrested in a drug bust in Nashville, Tennessee where officers seized 425 pounds of marijuana, 4 pounds of hashish and $355,000 in cash. "Nashville police say Breckenridge's Christopher Steven Crumbliss, 39, and Tasha Desmond, 21, were part of a group traveling around the country illegally selling high- grade marijuana from Colorado." Crumbliss had a history of brushes with the law connected with marijuana cultivation and distribution activities but claimed to be a caregiver. In 2007 he and his wife, Tiffany, were charged in Larimer County (Colorado) with marijuana cultivation and possession with intent to distribute. They argued they were protected under the caregiver provision of Colorado medical marijuana law. Charges against Tiffany were dropped and Christopher Crumbliss plead guilty but was given probation in Lieu of prison. A year later Larimer County Sheriff's Depaitment and DEA served search warrants at the Crumbliss' three homes in Larimer County and Blue River, seizing more than 200 plants and 20 pounds of finished product. There were no criminal charges filed. Tiffany Crumbliss is the owner of Soul Shine Medical Consulting, a medical marijuana dispensary in Breckenridge. She categorically denies that the marijuana seized in Nashville came from her business.4 "Weak Enforcement" Leads to Colorado Marijuana Trafficking Organizations: In March 2015, Colorado law enforcement secured indictments against 32 people accused of being part of a multi -million dollar organization growing marijuana in Colorado for distribution out of state. This group, although growing illegally, had warehouses in areas populated by licensed commercial marijuana growers. The organization operated under the false pretense of being medical marijuana caregivers. "Their real goal, SECTION 7: Diversion of Colorado Marijuana Page 1111 244 of 669 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 3/September 2015 according to the indictment, was to use Colorado's laws and commercial marijuana industry to 'hide in plain sight."' "Organization members 'subjectively felt Colorado's weak regulatory enforcement structure afforded them the easiest opportunity to conduct illegal marijuana and distribution activity with little to no consequences from law enforcement and civil regulators,' the indictment states." Apparently most of the marijuana, estimated at 400 pounds monthly, was exported primarily to Minnesota. In fact, an individual with a skydiving business is accused of using company aircraft for marijuana shipments between Colorado and Minnesota or Texas. Apparently this individual was stopped in Kansas and found to be in possession of 66 pounds of marijuana and $330,000 in cash. Sex Trafficking and Drugs: "Denver has evolved into a breeding ground, officials say, for sex -traffickers who lure young runaways, often in exchange for drugs, into the underground business." "Tom Ravenelle with the FBI said he's seeing more print and online advertisements - chock-full of keywords like '4-20 friendly' - that attract young girls." "A former prostitute who said she traded sex for marijuana talked to CBS4 anonymously about her experience." Apparently she ran away when she was 17 and fell into prostitution, bartering sex for drugs and didn't leave until more than two decades. "I traded for marijuana because that was my vice," she said. "I needed to escape."6 Legalization of Marijuana and Sex Tourism: • The legalization of marijuana is fueling a sex tourism industry in Colorado. • "Several victims were brought to Colorado specifically because of the availability of marijuana and the state being '420-friendly'."7 Outlaw Motorcycle Gang Affiliate Trafficking in Colorado Marijuana: In September 2014, Colorado law enforcement initiated an undercover operation involving the sale of large quantities of marijuana. A suspect sold an undercover agent 1 pound of marijuana for $2,300 and negotiated the sale of an additional 30 pounds of marijuana. Just prior to completing the sale, officers served a search warrant at the unregistered warehouse and the suspect's residence. Officers seized a sophisticated marijuana grow operation with 198 marijuana plants and approximately 31 pounds of marijuana. The entire investigation resulted in 2 arrests and the seizure of 1,600 marijuana plants, 36 pounds of processed marijuana, 22 firearms and over $100,000 in cash.s 1,100 Marijuana Plants in Lafayette, Colorado: David Melvin, 44, and Katie Melvin, 31, were arrested for growing 1,100 marijuana plants inside their home in Lafayette, Colorado. The two claimed the marijuana grow was legal, although the Colorado Department of Revenue "asserts that neither Kingsley [Katie Melvin's former SECTION 7: Diversion of Colorado Marijuana Page 1112 245 of 669 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 3/September 2015 business partner] nor the Melvins had any existing applications with the state, or with the city or county of Denver, with whom Katie told police she had applied."9 Pot Delivery Services Thriving in Colorado's Black Market: "Legalizing marijuana was supposed to largely eliminate the black market for pot, but a CBS4 Investigation found dealers have come off the street corner and onto the Internet, openly posing as legitimate delivery services. In just three hours, we contacted three delivery services and had marijuana products delivered all over Denver. The services claim to be perfectly legal because nothing was for sale. Instead of payment, buyers were expected to pay a pre -specified, cash 'donation'." In one case, a CBS4 employee appearing under age answered an ad for marijuana for a "$35 donation." When the marijuana delivery service arrived, the delivery man said that he had to get the money first and that he got the marijuana from a friend who was a grower for a dispensary. Another CBS4 employee responded to an ad for "Delicious Edibles for Donation." When ordering by text, the CBS4 employee asked if they were strong and the reply was, "Yes, will have a morbidly depressed person laughing on the floor." In the third case, the delivery driver claimed to be the chef who made the edibles and arrived with pre -packaged candies. Apparently they offered a full menu and the CBS4 employee ordered a $60 sampling but again there was no proof of age required. The delivery service offered to ship bulk orders. None of these delivery services would be interviewed on camera.70 Springfield Inundated by High-grade Marijuana from Colorado: Springfield, Missouri drug investigators are seeing an influx of high-grade marijuana, particularly from Colorado. A highway patrol sergeant says that the more potent marijuana has driven up the prices. In 2013, the Missouri State Highway Patrol seized 1,071 pounds of marijuana and approximately 1,700 pounds in 2014. So far in 2015, January through June, they seized more than 1,000 pounds. They also say that they have seen a huge increase in marijuana -infused food products.11 Medical Marijuana Scam Leads to Residence Turned Into Pot Farm: In June of 2015, a Colorado woman thought she was renting her home to a sweet couple from Florida who needed a place to live. What she didn't realize is this sweet couple was actually engaged in marijuana cultivation and trafficking. Apparently the couple turned the unfinished 2,800 sq. ft. basement into an elaborate marijuana cultivation facility. She said they had been cleaning up the mess for a week and that the tenants caused tens of thousands of dollars in damage. She said, "It absolutely makes me sick to my stomach." Apparently the tenant stated that his doctor had prescribed him 75 plants as well as his cousin and his cousin's wife. He claimed he was in compliance with the law. The lady who owned the home thought she was renting to a couple who SECTION 7: Diversion of Colorado Marijuana Page 1113 246 of 669 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 3/September 2015 were going to start a senior care service. Little did she know that the man had served 3- 1/2 years in prison for trafficking more than a ton of marijuana.12 Colorado Marijuana to Illinois and Georgia: In January 2015, Colorado law enforcement conducted an undercover operation into a marijuana trafficking organization shipping Colorado marijuana to Illinois and Georgia. The operation resulted in several undercover purchases of marijuana and a search warrant for the primary location. Pursuant to the search warrant, a 456 marijuana plant grow, a hash oil lab and 28 weapons were seized.13 Yellowstone Sees Rise in Marijuana Cases: "An increasing number of visitors to Yellowstone National Park are being prosecuted for possession small amounts of medical and recreational pot, which remains illegal on federal land." Park rangers attribute this increasing trend to ignorance of federal law and the growing prevalence of legal marijuana, including neighboring Colorado. In 2010, there were only 21 marijuana cases in Yellowstone which more than doubled in 2013 and quadrupled in 2014 as of December 17, 2014. There were 52 cases in 2013 and, as of December 17, 2014, 80 cases handled by the U.S. Attorneys Office in October 2013. An artist from Hawaii was pulled over for speeding and park rangers subsequently found 3 grams of marijuana which he admitted to purchasing in Colorado.74 Oklahoman Busted with 85 Pounds of Colorado Marijuana: In December 2014, two days after Oklahoma officials filed a lawsuit against the state of Colorado, a Tulsa subject was arrested with 85 pounds of marijuana and $20,000 in cash. Apparently the man and a mother -daughter team from Broken Arrow, Oklahoma were taking the marijuana to Tulsa. Officers found receipts showing that the three had gone to Colorado where they had purchased the marijuana.75 Undercover Operation in Boulder: On May 9, 2014 Boulder Police Department arrested six adults and one juvenile after a month -long undercover investigation. Apparently this group was responsible for distributing marijuana and psychedelic mushrooms to juveniles and adults in and around the Central Park area. The involved officers believe the marijuana was purchased from a local medical marijuana dispensary.16 Forged Marijuana Business Licenses: Anna Cozy, 36, was charged with forging marijuana business licenses. "The charges allege that Cozy was running a marijuana business in Denver and provided phony business licenses to inspectors."17 SECTION 7: Diversion of Colorado Marijuana Page 1114 247 of 669 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 3/September 2015 Colorado Marijuana -Infused Candy in Maryland: Prince Georges County (Maryland) police seized several boxes of candy that were infused with marijuana. The boxes were destined for Laurel, Maryland coming from Colorado and the West Coast. The candy included taffy, mint chocolate bars, blueberry chocolate bars and banana - walnut chocolate bars. The police put out a warning to parents to be aware of such products saying they are easily confused with real candy.'a State Shuts Down Pot Shops: The Department of Revenue has around 55 fulltime employees to keep "a closer eye" on over 2,000 marijuana businesses. However, in 2014 55 medical marijuana businesses closed compared to 35 during the 3 previous years combined. Some of the reasons for the closures include a dispensary with 4,000 ounces of marijuana beyond their per -patient limit, neglecting to implement required inventory tracking, failing to provide evidence that at least 70 percent of their stock was self - grown, insufficient internal cultivation and other violations of regulations. "In October, the Herbal Center in Denver was closed for a laundry list of infractions, including having more than 200 pounds of excess marijuana on its medical side, evidence of consumption on the premises, operating before obtaining a local license, inventory tracking errors and insufficient security." In Carbondale (Colorado) in 2011 the owner of Mother Earth Dispensary was arrested on charges of selling marijuana to unlicensed buyers and selling cocaine to undercover law enforcement officers.19 Craigslist Pot Sellers: Three men were arrested for selling 4-1/4 pounds of marijuana for $10,000. An undercover officer found a posting for an online marketplace for marijuana and made a contact. He made arrangements for the undercover purchase, meeting two of the individuals at one location and driving to another which was a licensed marijuana retailer. It was there they met another individual who was an employee of the retail marijuana operation who had a backpack full of marijuana. This individual "had been buying thousands of dollars` worth of marijuana from his employer, according to the [Denver Police Department's] Facebook post."20 2,630 Marijuana Plants in an Outdoor Grow on Public Land: On October 1, 2014 federal and local law enforcement seized an outdoor marijuana cultivation site with 2,630 marijuana plants on White River National Forest land. This grow operation was well tended by the growers. It had black piping supplying water to the grow operation from a stream that was dammed up to collect the water. Officers reported tents, food, shovels, tarps, weed spreader and other items for the grow operation, including piles of trash throughout the grow site?' SECTION 7: Diversion of Colorado Marijuana Page 1115 248 of 669 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 3ISeptember 2015 A Few Examples of Diversion Involving Youth Teacher Accused of Providing Pot to Students: A high school teacher in Thornton, Colorado was fired for allegedly providing marijuana to students. "One parent told FOX31 Denver, `My daughter is a senior at Pinnacle and she said that kids have been buying edibles as well as regular marijuana from her.'"22 Teen Shot During Hash Oil Deal: A man, with a female teenager, made arrangements over Facebook to buy "marijuana wax" (hash oil). When they met to consummate the transaction, one of the suspects got out of the vehicle and robbed the man at gunpoint. The man then drove after the suspect's vehicle from which a shot was fired, hitting the 16-year-old teenager and a dog that was in the man's vehicle 23 Mother Provided Marijuana to Son Who Jumped From Window: The mother of a 19-year-old teenager was arrested for providing a marijuana edible brownie to her son. On April 14, 2015, the young man consumed one dose of edible marijuana brownie and started acting strangely. According to witnesses, he ran toward the living room window and jumped three stories to the ground. A neighbor reports that he heard the window shatter when the young man jumped and found him lying bloodied on the ground. Reports indicate he was covered in glass and blood but was confused when he ran up to him to ask for help. According to a neighbor, the young man didn't realize he had jumped from a window.24 Mom Supplies Marijuana Edibles: In February 2015, a 14-year-old was taken by ambulance to a hospital after eating homemade marijuana -infused candy. The student obtained the candy from a fellow student who brought it to school after his mom had made it at home. The mother, who claims to be a consultant for marijuana manufacturing, stated that the candy did not contain any marijuana. Apparently the Colorado Bureau of Investigation disagreed as analysis of the candy revealed it did contain marijuana. The mother will be charged with contributing to the delinquency of a minor.25 Girl Eats Father's Marijuana -Laced Bar: A young Wisconsin girl ate a THC-laced chocolate bar that was purchased in Colorado and brought back to Wisconsin. The girl said she found the bar in the dresser drawer of her father's bedroom. When school officers were alerted, the young girl's pulse was so weak that the officers were unable to read it. When officers served a search warrant at the girl's residence, they found infused marijuana labeled as being medicinal THC. The officers also seized hash oil, a concentrated form of THC.26 SECTION 7: Diversion of Colorado Marijuana Page 1116 249 of 669 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 3/September 2015 Some Examples from School Resource Officers27 Middle School Drug Organization: "On an incident three students, one -sixth, seventh and eighth graders, were involved in sale, transport and exchange of marijuana. One of the students was the salesman the other would transport the weed and Last student would collect the money. All the students were reported by the buyer. All received a citation." Medical Marijuana "Patient" Sells at High School: "19 years of age non -student leaves medical marijuana dispensary and drives straight to my high school. The non - student was able to blend in inside the school and was attempting to sell his medical marijuana to students in the lunch room. He went to jail. Approximately three ounces of marijuana was recovered from his car in the parking lot." Mom is Source: "In February 2015, a high school student was contacted on campus with marijuana and marijuana edibles that she was given by her mother who legally obtained them recreationally." Dispensary Marijuana: "More than 50% of confiscated marijuana was in dispensary containers." Grow Operation "Discards": "Students are retrieving discards from a grow operation to re -sell as true product. Charged with felony distribution." 13-Year-Old Dealer: "In February 2014, a 13 year old was dealing marijuana to two other students after stealing marijuana from his father's medical supply." 10-Year-Old Dealer: "A ten year old boy selling marijuana to other ten year olds on school grounds. Boy got the drugs from parents stuff." Lock and Key: loth grade student takes approximately three ounces of medical marijuana from parents inventory and brings it to school where he was attempting to sell it to other students. Parents were adamant that he couldn't have got it from their supply as they have the only key to gain access to it. They were wrong." SECTION 7: Diversion of Colorado Marijuana Page {117 250 of 669 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 3/September 2015 Some Examples from School Counselors28 Dealing Pot at School: • "Last spring we had a 10th grade student who sold marijuana to another student in the men's faculty bathroom." • "October, 2014. 7th grade students reported another 7th grader trying to sell marijuana at school. He was searched and the substance was found. Got it from dad's supply." • "A seventh grade student was caught selling edibles to classmates in the hallway. The student was suspended. An 8th grade student was caught carrying a knife and an empty container of marijuana in his backpack. He was also suspended. Ironically, he was one of the students. Who was caught buying the brownies from the 7th grade student." Comments Nebraska Sheriff Speaks Out Against Marijuana Source: Adam Hayward, the sheriff of Deuel County, Nebraska, which is right by the state line with Colorado, says he has "arrested all sorts of people carrying marijuana back from Colorado along Interstate 76: teenagers making weekend runs to Denver and once a 67 year old grandmother." In reference to a 75 pound seizure of marijuana, he stated that the pot came from a marijuana growing facility in Colorado.24 Sidney, Nebraska Chief of Police Rolls Eyes at Colorado Ads: The Chief of Police of Sidney, Nebraska felt that the radio ads by the Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment telling people not to take marijuana out of the state were a joke. He says, "Do you really think that somebody listening to that is going to say, `Oh, they said on the radio I shouldn't take my marijuana back into Nebraska. So because they said it on the radio and I got a warning, I'm gonna listen to it'? Nah." Since Colorado has had retail stores, police in rural counties that border Colorado are reporting big increases in illegal marijuana trafficking. The chief says they have seen a 50 percent increase during that time.30 Black Market is Thriving in Colorado: Colorado Attorney General Cynthia Coffman, in referencing the marijuana black market, stated "Don't buy that," she told the room (fellow state attorneys general at a professional conference in February). "The criminals are still selling on the black market. ...We have plenty of cartel activity in Colorado (and) plenty of illegal activity that has not decreased at all."31 SECTION 7: Diversion of Colorado Marijuana Page 1118 251 of 669 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 3/September 2015 Oklahoma Sheriff's Deputy Reference Colorado Marijuana: "We're running into more people with marijuana out of Colorado - just a regular, old traffic stop," said Dillon March, a sheriff's deputy in Custer County, Oklahoma who regularly patrols Interstate 40, a major east -west freeway stretching across the country. "They'll drive to Colorado, they'll pick it (marijuana) up, and they'll drive back to where they're from, whether that be Oklahoma, Texas, Missouri or Arkansas."32 Sources Carla Field, WYFF4.com, January 13, 2015, "Traffic stop yields more than $900K worth of pot," <http://www.wyff4.com/news/Traffic-stop-yields-mare-than-900K- worth-of-pot/30682306>, accessed January 13, 2015 2 JC Cortez, Amarillo GIove-News/Amarillo.com, November 21, 2014, "Troopers seize 33 pounds of pot," <ht1p://arnarillo.com/news/local-news/2014-11-21/troopers-seize-33- pounds-pot>, accessed November 21, 2014 3 Harrison Keegan, Springfield News -Leader, December 8, 2014, "Police say men collected medical pot in Colorado and sold it in Springfield", <http://www.news- leader. com/story/news/local/ozarks/2014/12/08/police-say-men-colle cted-medical-pot- colorado-sold-springfield/20100513/>, accessed December 10, 2014 4 Ben Trollinger, Summit Daily, December 1, 2014, "Two Breckenridge residents charged in Nashville marijuana bust netting 4251bs. of pot", <http://www. summitdaily. com/news/14058026-113/marijuana-crumbliss-chase- county>, accessed December 1, 2014 5 John Ingold, The Denver Post, March 25, 2015, "32 indicted in massive Colorado marijuana trafficking investigation", <http: //www. denverpost.cam/news/ci_27783732/32-indicted-massive-colorado- marijuana-trafficking-investigation>, accessed June 23, 2015 6 CBS4 News/Denver, September 1, 2014, "Sex -Trafficking Lures Increasing In Denver, Officials Say," <http://denver.cbslocal.com/2014/09/01/sex-trafficking-lures- increasing-in-denver-officials-say/>, accessed April 15, 2015 Colorado Springs Police Department, "2014 Year -End Human Trafficking Demographic Report," February 3, 2015 SECTION 7: Diversion of Colorado Marijuana Page 1119 252 of 669 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol, 3/September 2015 8 Rocky Mountain High Intensity Drug Trafficking Area, 2015 9 Alex Burness, Daily Camera, January 31, 2015, "1,100 marijuana plants uncovered at alleged illegal grow in Lafayette," <http://www.dailycamera.com/top- stories/ci_27436704/1-100-marijuana-plants-uncovered-at-alleged-illegal>, accessed February 1, 2015 70 Denver (CBS4), "Pot Delivery Services Thriving In Colorado's Black Market," May 6, 2015, <http://denver.cbslocal.cam/2015/05/06/pot-delivery-services-thriving-in- colorados-black-market/>, accessed May 7, 2015 11 KCTV 5 News, Kansas City, "Springfield inundated by high-grade marijuana from Colorado, June 29, 2015, <http://www.kctv5.com/story/29430277/springfield-inundated- by-high-grade-marijuana-from-colorado>, information from Springfield News -Leader, <http://www.news-leader.com>, accessed June 30, 2015 12 Brandon Rittiman, KUSA-Channel 9 News, June 8, 2015, "Renters turn house into pot farm," <http://www.9news.com/story/news/local/2015/06/08/renters-turn-house- into-pot-farm/28713457/>, accessed June 9, 2015 13 Rocky Mountain High Intensity Drug Trafficking Area op cit 14 Ben Neary, Associated Press, January 4, 2015, "Yellowstone sees rise in marijuana cases," <http://www.tri-cityherald.com/2015/01/04/3341300_yellowstone-sees-rise-in- marijuana.html?sp=/99/900/1154/&rh=1#storylink=cpy>, accessed January 4, 2015 15 KOCO-TV (Oklahoma City), December 24, 2014, "Police say Tulsa man busted with Colorado pot," <http://www.koco.com/news/Police-say-Tulsa-man-busted-with- Colorado-pot/30389266>, accessed December 24, 2014 16 Mitchell Byars of the Daily Camera, The Denver Post, Saturday, May 10, 2014, page 16A NEWS section, "Seven arrested in drug bust by Boulder police" 77 Anthony Cotton, The Denver Post, December 17, 2014, "Woman charged with forging marijuana business licenses", <http: //www. denverpost. com/news/ci_27156731 /woman -charged -forging -marijuana - business -licenses>, accessed December 17, 2014 SECTION 7: Diversion of Colorado Marijuana Page 1120 253 of 669 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol, 3/September 2015 18 Associated Press, The Washington Times, October 31, 2014, "Maryland police seize marijuana -infused candy," <http://www.washingtontimes.corn/news/2014/oct/31/maryland-police-seize-marijuana- laced-candy/>, accessed November 1, 2014 791 Will Grandbois, Glenwood Springs Post Independent, December 9, 2014, "State closes dozens of med pot shops in'14", <http://www.aspentimes.com/news/14170766- 113/marijuana-medical-recreational-state>, accessed December 9, 2014 20 Noelle Philips, The Denver Post/Denver and The West Section, Sunday, May 10, 2015, "Denver police say three men tried to sell pot using Craigslist," <http ://wwwdenverpost. com/news/ci_28079525/denver-police-s ay -three -men -tried -sell - pot>, accessed May 10, 2015 21 Two Rivers Drug Enforcement Team, e-mail June 16, 2014 "MJ Grow in Pitkin County" 22 Justin Joseph, KDVR-TV/Fox 31 Denver, February 12, 2015, "Teacher at Pinnacle Charter High School fired, accused of providing pot to students," <http://kdvr.com/2015/02/12/te acher-at-pinnacle-charter-high-school-fired-accused-of- providing-pot-to-students/>, accessed February 13, 2015. 23 Robert Garrison, 9News-KUSA, March 18, 2015, "Teen shot during hash oil deal outside Aurora Target," <hEEp://www.9news.com/story/news/local/2015/03/17/teen-dog- shot-in-robbery-at-aurora-target/24942985/>, accessed May 7, 2015 24 CBS4Denver, April 23, 2015, "Mom Arrested For Allegedly Giving Edibles To Son Who Jumped From 3rd Story," <http://denver.cbslocal.com/2015/04/23/mom-arrested- pot-edibles-teen-jumped-third-story/>, accessed May 6, 2015 25 E-mail from Sergeant Jim Gerhardt, Thornton Police Department, "Marijuana Incident", April 1, 2015 26 Brenna Linsley, The Chippewa Herald/Associated Press, August 31, 2014, "Girl eats father's marijuana -laced bar", <http://chippewa.com/news/local/complaint-girl-eats- father-s-marijuana-laced-bar/article_da742ff8-a4e8-57eb-b408-5272d0055d2f.html>, accessed August 31, 2014 27 Colorado Association of School Resource Officers written survey, Rocky Mountain HIDTA, 2015 SECTION 7: Diversion of Colorado Marijuana Page 1121 254 of 669 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 3/September 2015 28 School Counselor survey by Rocky Mountain HIDTA 29 Alison Stewart, PBS Newshour (transcript), February 14, 2015, "Between a rock and cannabis: How neighboring states struggle when pot becomes legal," <http://www.pb s.org/newshour/bb/rock-cannabis-neighboring-states-struggle-pot- becomes-legal/>, accessed February 14, 2015 3o Kirk Siegler, National Public Radio, February 3, 2015, "Nebraska Says Colorado Pot Isn't Staying Across The Border," <http: //www.npr. org/2015/02/03/382646498/nebrask a-says-colorado-pot-isnt-staying-on- its-side-of-the-border>, accessed February 4, 2015 37 The Gazette, March 23, 2015, "Special report, 'Clearing the Haze:' Black market is thriving in Colorado," <http://gazette.com/black-market-is-thriving-in- colorado/article/1548305>, accessed March 24, 2015 32 The Gazette, March 23, 2015, "Special report, `Clearing the Haze:Black market is thriving in Colorado," <http://gazette.com/black-market-is-thriving-in- colorado/article/1548305>, accessed March 24, 2015 33 School Counselor survey by Rocky Mountain HIDTA SECTION 7: Diversion of Colorado Marijuana Page 1 122 255 of 669 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 3/September 2015 SEC710N 8: Diversion by Parcel Introduction This section examines whether Colorado's legalized medical marijuana industry and the recent legalization of marijuana for recreational use has established Colorado as a source state for marijuana for other parts of the country. The use of parcel packages as a drug transportation method has gained popularity with drug traffickers. The available information compares the years 2009 through 2013 considered the medical marijuana commercialization/expansion era (2009 - current) and the recreational marijuana era (2013 - current) in Colorado. • 2006 - 2008: There were between 1,000 and 4,800 medical marijuana cardholders and no known dispensaries operating in Colorado. • 2009 - Current: There were over 108,000 medical marijuana cardholders and 532 licensed dispensaries operating in Colorado by the end of 2012. See the introduction at the beginning of this report for more details on the commercialization and explosion of Colorado's medical marijuana trade. • 2013 - Current: In November 2012, Colorado voters passed Constitutional Amendment 64 which legalized marijuana for recreational purposes for anyone over 21 years of age. The amendment also allowed for licensed marijuana retail stores, cultivation operations and edibles manufacturing. Some Findings • From 2010 - 2014, the number of intercepted U.S. mail packages of marijuana from Colorado, has increased 2,033 percent from 15 to 320. • In just one year, from 2013 to 2014 when retail marijuana businesses began operating, there was a 55 percent increase in Colorado marijuana packages seized in the mail. SECTION 8: Diversion of Colorado Marijuana by Parcel Page 1123 256 of 669 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 3/September 2015 • From 2010 — 2014, the total pounds of marijuana seized from U.S. packages mailed from Colorado has increased 722 percent from 57 to 470 pounds. • Between 2010 and 2014, the number of states destined to receive marijuana mailed from Colorado has increased each year from 10 to 38. • From 2006 — 2008, compared to 2013 — 2014, the average number of parcels containing Colorado marijuana seized that were destined outside the United States increased over 7,750 percent and the pounds of marijuana seized in those parcels increased over 1,079 percent. Data NOTE: THESE FIGURES ONLY REFLECT PACKAGES SEIZED; THEY DO NOT INCLUDE PACKAGES OF COLORADO MARIJUANA THAT WERE MAILED AND REACHED THE INTENDED DESTINATION. INTERDICTION EXPERTS BELIEVE THE PACKAGES SEIZED WERE JUST THE "TIP OF THE ICEBERG." Number of Parcels Parcels Containing Marijuana Mailed from Colorado to Another State 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 SOURCE: United States Postal Inspection Service, Prohibited Mailing of Narcotics, as of January 21, 2015 SECTION 8: Diversion of Colorado Marijuana by Parcel Page 1124 257 of 669 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 3/September 2015 600 500 I400 W c 300 200 100 0 Pounds of Colorado Marijuana Seized by the U.S. Postal Inspection Service Le atizatian 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 SOURCE: United States Postal Inspection Service, Prohibited Mailing of Narcotics, as of January 21, 2015 Number of Different States 25 15 10 Number of States Destined to Receive Marijuana Mailed from Colorado Legalization ommerciaiization 10 2009 2010 1. 2011 2012 2013 SOURCE: United States Postal Inspection Service - Prohibited Mailing of Narcotics 38 2014 SECTION 8: Diversion of Colorado Marijuana by Parcel Page 1125 258 of 669 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol, 31September 2015 NOTE: INFORMATION ON THIS PAGE (PG. 12b) WAS REMOVED AS IT WAS DISCOVERED TO BE INACCURATE INFORMATION RELATED TO SOME COLORADO PARCELS OF MARIJUANA BEING SENT OUTSIDE THE UNITED STATES. REMAINDER OF THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK SECTION 8: Diversion of Colorado Marijuana by Parcel Page 1126 259 of 669 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 3/September 2015 NOTE: INFORMATION ON THIS PAGE (PG. 127) WAS REMOVED AS IT WAS DISCOVERED TO BE INACCURATE INFORMATION RELATED TO SOME COLORADO PARCELS OF MARIJUANA BEING SENT OUTSIDE THE UNITED STATES. A Few Parcel Examples ❖ There are courier delivery service companies, with locations throughout the country, from which Colorado marijuana destined for other states have been seized. Unlike the U.S. Postal Service, a central data repository does not exist for these various private couriers. Bad Luck in Marijuana Industry Leads to Arrest: In April 2015, a major parcel company alerted Chicago Police to a package coming from Colorado that had a strong odor of marijuana. Police obtained a search warrant and seized nearly 7 pounds of marijuana. The individual to whom the package was delivered was arrested. This individual was identified as part of the young entrepreneurs who went to Colorado about five years prior to make money in the medical marijuana industry. Apparently he moved to Colorado and grew marijuana plants in a warehouse outside of Denver. At the same time, his wife operated a small medical marijuana dispensary in Denver. Prior to this arrest in 2015, he was arrested in 2010 by Chicago Police for a parcel post package containing 40 pounds of marijuana. The individual reflected on his hard luck in the medical marijuana business and stated, "Some people in the industry have gotten lucky. Other guys like me have gotten caught in the system."' REMAINDER OF THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK SECTION 8: Diversion of Colorado Marijuana by Parcel Page 1127 260 of 669 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 3/September 2015 North Metro Task Force Busy with Parcel Cases: North Metro Task Force responded to 142 packages containing marijuana from just one parcel company. They have had additional cases with two other major parcel companies.' Medical Marijuana Store Owner to Receive $16,000: In February 2015, three suspicious parcels were identified. A search warrant was obtained and revealed the packages contained over $16,000 in cash. These three parcels, all coming from different locations including Idaho, Pennsylvania and Illinois, were destined for a Colorado Springs metro area medical marijuana store owner.' Colorado Marijuana Selfie: In February 2015, a Texas man was arrested for trying to send himself marijuana and marijuana products he purchased in Pueblo, Colorado. Apparently the subject purchased the marijuana in Pueblo and then mailed it to himself in San Angelo, Texas where he resides. The package, when seized, contained 9 pounds of "high-grade marijuana" and marijuana edibles as well as cough syrups, skin patches and "wax" that had been "legally purchased" from two separate dispensaries in Pueblo. This individual was arrested in Texas.3 Breck Man Gets Pot Christmas Presents at New York Hotel": In December, 2014, a 28-year-old Breckenridge, Colorado resident was taken into custody for possession of over 16 pounds of marijuana. Apparently he used the U.S. Postal Service to ship the marijuana, wrapped as Christmas presents, to himself in New York.' It`s Illegal to Ship Marijuana Out of State?: In October 2013, North Metro Task Force investigated a package containing 10.2 pounds of marijuana and 3.4 pounds of edibles being shipped to Florida. They were able to identify the individual, a former resident of Florida, who was sending packages to relatives living in Florida. He claimed he didn't realize it was illegal to ship marijuana and edibles.' Castle Rock Man Mails Pot: An individual in Castle Rock, Colorado plead guilty to sending more than 100 packages of marijuana to "locations across the country and receiving several hundred thousand dollars through the mail in return." The U.S. Attorney's Office in Colorado reports that searches of the subject's apartment and vehicle turned up approximately 24 pounds of marijuana, marijuana extract and marijuana edibles. The authorities also seized $53,000 in cash.' SECTION 8: Diversion of Colorado Marijuana by Parcel Page 1 128 261 of 669 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 3/September 2015 Colorado Marijuana to Broward County, Florida: In 2014, there were nine separate parcels received in Broward County, Florida that were marijuana originating from Colorado. The total weight was 30.17 pounds with one package as small as 4 grams and another as large as 17 pounds. There was hash oil and marijuana candy seized in two of the packages. Four of the packages were sent from Denver, two from Aurora, one from Lakewood, one from Colorado Springs and one from Golden.' 25 Parcels Seized Going to 13 States: In 2014, one parcel facility seized 25 packages containing marijuana from Colorado with a total weight of 123 pounds. They were able to identify that nine of the packages came directly from Denver, three from Littleton, two from Aurora, two from Breckenridge and the rest were sent from six other cities in Colorado.2 Brownies to Florida: In March 2015, the West Metro Task Force responded to a parcel company that opened a suspicious package and found two baggies with marijuana brownies, along with a business card. The card read "Sweet Mary Jane — Merciful Chocolate." The package was destined for Sulphur Springs, Florida.2 Regular Customer: In January 2014, a suspicious parcel was located which subsequently lead to a search warrant revealing 1.2 pounds of marijuana. Law enforcement was able to identify the sender who was shipping the marijuana from Colorado to Maryland. The individual was a frequent customer at this parcel location.2 Colorado Marijuana to Northern Florida: In Northern Florida, 15 marijuana and/or hashish parcels from Colorado had been sent to Florida weighing a total of 40.5 pounds. All the marijuana was hydroponic and destined for Florida with the exception of one 5.7 pound package that was destined for Georgia.2 Highway Traffic Stop Results in Package Interception: In July 2014, two subjects traveling from Aurora, Colorado to Des Moines, Iowa were stopped on Interstate 76 in Colorado for a traffic violation. During the stop, a receipt from a major parcel company was discovered. The package on the receipt was subsequently intercepted and 3.5 pounds of marijuana was seized.2 Colorado to Arkansas: In April 2014, a parcel company turned over a package containing 5.4 ounces of marijuana to TRIDENT. Apparently the package, coming from Garfield County, Colorado, was en route to Jonesboro, Arkansas.2 Regular Packages from Colorado to South Dakota: In July 2014, North Metro Task Force investigated a package containing 3.2 pounds of marijuana being shipped from SECTION 8: Diversion of Colorado Marijuana by Parcel Page 1129 262 of 669 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact VoI. 3/September 2015 Colorado to Rapid City, South Dakota. The follow-up investigation with the South Dakota authorities resulted in the suspect confessing to have received packages from Colorado on a regular basis.' Stuffed Animals with Marijuana: In June 2015, Loveland Police Department was called out on a suspicious package from a parcel company. They discovered that the package contained stuffed animals full of marijuana and weighing over 2 ounces. The package was coming from Colorado en route to Navarre, Florida.2 Hash to Florida: In January 2015, a customer acting very suspicious attempted to ship a parcel from the Colorado Springs area to Florida. This individual subsequently gave consent to open the parcel, which contained approximately 5 ounces of hash.2 5 Pounds to Houston, Texas: In May 2015, West Metro Task Force investigators were called by a parcel company who had discovered five 1-pound packages of marijuana destined to be shipped to Houston, Texas.' Helping a Friend: In September 2014, West Metro Task Force investigators responded when a 29-year-old male attempted to send an overnight package containing miscellaneous food items and marijuana concentrate. When arrested, the individual told the investigators he was attempting to "help" a friend who lived in Hawaii.2 Halloween Candy from Colorado: In October 2014, law enforcement in the Metropolitan Washington, DC area seized three parcels containing approximately 7.2 pounds of THC-laced Halloween candy. These parcels originated from Colorado and were set to be delivered to an address in Maryland.' Colorado Marijuana to Mississippi: In 2014, there were six packages with marijuana from Colorado being sent to Mississippi via parcels. The total weight of the six parcels was 9.7 pounds.2 Sources 1 CBS2 Local/Chicago, April 6, 2015, "Man Busted Again For Colorado -To -Chicago UPS Marijuana Shipment," <http://Chicago.cbslocal.com/2015/04/06/man-busted-again- for-Colorado-to-Chicago-ups-marijuana-shipment/>, accessed April 6, 2015 SECTION 8: Diversion of Colorado Marijuana by Parcel Page 1130 263 of 669 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 31September 2015 2 Rocky Mountain High Intensity Drug Trafficking Area, 2015 3 Jesse Paul, The Denver Post/Denver and the West Section, February 5, 2015, "Pueblo police: Texas man arrested after trying to send $63,000 of marijuana," <http://wwwdenverpost. corn/news/ci_27465615/pueblo-police-texas-man-arrested- after-trying-send?source=infin to>, accessed February 5, 2015 4 Allison Sylte, 9News.com, December 17, 2014, "Breck man gets pot Christmas presents at NY hotel," <http://www.9news.com/story/news/crime/2014/12/17/david- malchow-marijuana-christmas-present/20548229/>, accessed December 18, 2014 5 The Denver Post/Colorado Roundup Section, May 13, 2015 "Castle Rock Man pleads guilty to mailing marijuana." SECTION 8: Diversion of Colorado Marijuana by Parcel Page 1131 264 of 669 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 3/September 2015 THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK SECTION 8: Diversion of Colorado Marijuana by Parcel Page 1132 265 of 669 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 3/September 2015 SECTIQN 9: THC Extraction Labs Introduction Since the de facto and actual legalization of marijuana, many new trends have developed. The emergence of the THC extraction lab, commonly referred to as a butane hash oil (BHO) lab, is a prime example. The major draw to marijuana extraction is the potency of the final product. Some marijuana concentrates can contain 80-90 percent THC, whereas an average size marijuana cigarette averages 10-15 percent THC. Marijuana users state that vaporizing even a small amount of marijuana concentrate produces a more euphoric high than smoking. There are several solvents that can be used during the extraction process, including acetone, butane, carbon dioxide (CO2), hexane and rubbing alcohol. However, butane hash oil extraction has become an increasingly popular method of producing marijuana concentrate. The process involves forcing butane through an extraction tube filled with finely -ground marijuana. The residue that emerges from the other end is a mixture of highly -concentrated THC and butane. Once the butane has completely evaporated, the final product is a viscous liquid known as "dab," "wax,", "shatter", or "earwax," to name a few. This product does not emit the characteristic odor of traditional marijuana. Butane is a very volatile and explosive solvent. Flash fire explosions have originated from the butane used in the extraction process. Several elements can spark a deadly explosion, such as static electricity, open flame from a cigarette lighter, or a simple electric switch. This process has sent several individuals to the hospital for burn treatments and the numbers continue to rise. This section examines the trends in both extraction lab explosions and the resulting injuries. The information in this section covers the medical marijuana commercialization and expansion era (2009 - current) and the recreational marijuana era (2013 - current) in Colorado. SECTION 9: THC Extraction Labs Page 1133 266 of 669 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 3/September 2015 Some Findings • From 2013 - 2014 there was a 167 percent increase in reported Colorado THC extraction lab explosions from 12 to 32. • From 2013 - 2014, there was a 67 percent increase of injuries related to Colorado THC extraction lab explosions from 18 to 30. • Top three cities where a THC extraction lab explosion occurred in Colorado in 2014: o Denver=7 o Grand Junction = 4 o Colorado Springs = 3 • In 2014, 94 percent of all explosions occurred in a residential setting. • As of September 9, 2015, there have only been 7 THC extraction lab explosions reported. Data QS Mx 20 • 15 Z 10 THC Extraction Lab Explosions 2009 2010 2011 2012 SOURCE: Rocky Mountain HIDTA, Investigative Support Center 2013 2014 SECTION 9: THC Extraction Labs Page 1134 267 of 669 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Number of Injuries Vol. 3/September 2015 THC Extraction Lab Explosion Injuries 2009 2010 2011 2012 SOURCE: Rocky Mountain HIDTA, Investigative Support Center Number of Burn Victims 2013 2014 University of Colorado Hospital THC Extraction Lab Self -Admitted Bum Victims 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 2011 2012 2013 SOURCE: University Hospital Burn Unit — University of Colorado Hospital 2014 SECTION 9: THC Extraction Labs Page 1 135 268 of 669 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 3/September 2015 • Some of the injuries from the extraction process include, but are not limited to, severe burns to the hands, arms and face. The University Hospital Burn Unit - University of Colorado Hospital reports several cases in which skin grafts were required to repair the injuries.1 It should be noted that based on the first seven months of reported THC extraction lab explosions in 2015, there appears to be a significant decline from the previous two years. This is largely due to the publicity generated by the police, fire, healthcare and media in 2014 regarding the dangers of THC extraction labs. As of September 9, 2015, only seven lab explosions have been reported to Rocky Mountain HIDTA and only four lab -related injuries reported to the Burn Center. Sources ' Camy Boyle, MS, RN, CCRN, CCNS, associate nurse manager, University Hospital Burn Unit - University of Colorado Hospital, personal interview, March 2014 Rocky Mountain HIDTA compiled the data provided by local, fire and police departments. SECTION 9: THC Extraction Labs Page 1136 269 of 669 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 3/September 2015 SECTION 10: Related Data Topics • Crime • Revenue • Homeless • Suicides • Environmental Impact • THC Potency • Marijuana Use and Alcohol Consumption • Medical Marijuana Registry • Licensed Marijuana Businesses as of January 2015 • Business Comparisons as of January 2015 • Demand and Market Size • 2014 Reported Sales of Marijuana in Colorado • 2014 Price of Marijuana • Local Response to the Medical and Recreational Marijuana Industry in Colorado • Polling • Lawsuits • Other Issues Crime Denver Crime: Some proponents from the marijuana industry claim that, since marijuana retail stores began on January 1, 2014, the crime rate in Denver has decreased. Actually, reported crime in Denver increased 10 percent during that time period. SECTION 10: Related Data Page 1137 270 of 669 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Number of Crimes 180,000 160,000 140,000 120,000 100,000 80,000 60,000 40,000 20,000 Colorado Crime Vol. 3/September 2015 V 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 • Property Crimes 158,064 158,213 159,536 159,397 164,973 167,802 165,483 ■ Violent Crimes 16,062 16,608 16,676 16,278 15,719 16,056 16,355 SOURCE: Colorado Bureau of Investigation, http:/icrimeinco.cbi.state.co.us/ All Reported C 2013 2014 55,115 reported crimes 60,788 reported crimes 5,391 reported crimes increase from 2013 to 2014 (10 percent increase) • Crimes against persons increased 15.1 percent • Crimes against property decreased 3 percent • Crimes against society increased 23 percent • All other offenses increased 41 percent SOURCE: National Incident Based Reporting System definitions in the City and County of Denver, September 11, 2015 SECTION 10: Related Data Page 1138 271 of 669 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact 2014 2013 2012 2011 2010 2009 0 City and County of Denver Crime ■ Property Crimes • Violent Crimes 5,000 10,000 15,000 20,000 Numberof Crimes 25,000 Vol. 3/September 2015 ,573 31,345 32,55 31,719 9,551 30,371 30,000 35,000 SOURCE: City and County of Denver, Denver Police Department, Crime Statistics and Maps, September 10, 2015 Number of Incidents Total Marijuana -Related Crime for Denver City and County 300 250 200 150 100 50 0 2012 2013 2014 SOURCE: City and County of Denver Open Source Data Catalog, July 2015 NOTE: "DATA ARE CRIMES REPORTED TO THE DENVER POLICE DEPARTMENT WHICH, UPON REVIEW, WERE DETERMINED TO HAVE CLEAR CONNECTIONS OR RELATION TO MARIJUANA. THESE DATA DO NOT INCLUDE POLICE REPORTS FOR VIOLATIONS RESTRICTING THE POSSESSION, SALE, AND/OR CULTIVATION OF MARIJUANA." - OPEN DATA CATALOG, MARIJUANA CRIME, DATA.DENVERGOV.ORG SECTION 10: Related Data Page 1139 272 of 669 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol, 3/September 2015 Marijuana -Related Crime for Denver City and County 180 160 y 140 4:1 120 100 80 S 60 40 20 0 2012 2013 2014 SOURCE: City and County of Denver Open Source Data Catalog, July 2015 It Non -Industry t Industry The majority of marijuana -related crime was the burglary of licensed marijuana businesses. NOTE: "DATA ARE CRIMES REPORTED TO THE DENVER POLICE DEPARTMENT WHICH, UPON REVIEW, WERE DETERMINED TO HAVE CLEAR CONNECTIONS OR RELATION TO MARIJUANA. THESE DATA DO NOT INCLUDE POLICE REPORTS FOR V1OL:ATIONS RESTRICTING THE POSSESSION, SALE, AND/OR CULTIVATION OF MARIJUANA," - OPEN DATA CATALOG, MARIJUANA CRIME, DATA.DENVERGOV.ORG SECTION 10: Related Data Page 1140 273 of 669 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 3/September 2015 Nu mber of Arrests/Citations 800 700 600 500 400 300 200 100 0 Denver Police Department Unlawful Public Display/Consumption of Marijuana 2012 2013 2014 SOURCE: Denver Police Department, Traffic Operations Bureau via Vice/Drug Bureau Nutnberof Citations Boulder Police Department Marijuana Public Consumption Citations 140 120 100 80 60 40 20 0 2013 2014 SOURCE Boulder Police Department, Records and Information Services NOTE: THE CITY OF BOULDER DID NOT HAVE A MUNICIPAL STATUTE SPECIFIC TO PUBLIC CONSUMPTION OF MARIJUANA UNTIL MID-2013, "City Leaders in Vail recently banned recreational marijuana stores, sighting (sic) the increase in crime and panhandling in other mountain towns that do allow sales, as a major factor their ban."' SECTION 10: Related Data Page 1141 274 of 669 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 3/September 2015 Revenue Question: How much revenue will the recreational marijuana industry generate in Colorado? Will the income exceed the cost related to the impact of legalization in Colorado? Answer: No one knows for sure. It will take years of data collection to complete an analysis of whether marijuana legalization is economically positive or an economic disaster. Total Revenue from Marijuana Taxes, Calendar Year 2014 60,000,000 50,000,000 40,000, 000 etim s. 30,000,000 20,000,000 10,000,000 0 2.9% Regular Sales 10% Special Sales 15% Excise Total 2014 Taxes ■ Retail. Marijuana Taxes Of Medical Marijuana Taxes SOURCE: Colorado Department of Revenue, Monthly Marijuana Taxes, Licenses and Fees Transfers and Distribution NOTE: FIGURES Do NOT INCLUDE ANY CITY TAXES: THE STATE DOES NOT ASSESS OR COLLECT THOSE TAXES. SECTION 10: Related Data Page 1142 275 of 669 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 3/September 2015 Colorado's Total General Fund Revenue, FY 2015* t Marijuana Tax Revenue (Medical and Recreational) = 0.7% "Preliminary Numbers based on June 2015 Forecast SOURCE: Colorado Office of State Planning and Budgeting, June 2015 Forecast (eleven months of data) Total marijuana tax revenue (medical and recreational) for FY2015 comprises 7/10 of 1 percent (0.7%) of Colorado's total general fund revenue. SECTION 10: Related Data Page 1143 276 of 669 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 3/September 2015 Some Costs Related to Marijuana Revenue for the State of Colorado FY2015/162 $13,000,728 $314,633 $3,292,643 $271,328 $190,097 $436,766 $1,168,000 $320,388 $2,150,000 $212,369 $21,806,952 $6,600,000 $29,900,000 Department of Revenue (includes the Marijuana Enforcement Division) Department of Agriculture Department of Public Health and Environment (primarily medical marijuana) Department of Public Safety Governor's Office of Marijuana Coordination Department of Law Department of Law (Peace Officer Standards and Training) Department of Public Health and Environment Department of Public Health and Environment (Marijuana public education campaign) Department of Local Affairs TOTAL Estimate distributed to local government (FY 2014/15) Estimate collected for school construction (18 months, January, 2014 - June, 2015) NOTE: THESE ARE BUDGETED AMOUNTS AND MAY NOT REPRESENT ACTUAL SPENDING. DOES NOT INCLUDE COSTS TO LOCAL GOVERNMENT NOR ANY COSTS ASSOCIATED WITH SOCIETAL IMPACTS SUCH AS TRAFFIC DEATHS AND EMERGENCY ROOM ADMISSIONS. Articles Colorado Weed Czar: Revenue Up in Smoke: According to Andrew Freedman, director of the Colorado Governor's Office of Marijuana Coordination, most revenue generated from legal marijuana sales will be used to regulate the industry. "Freedman, who is tasked with keeping tabs on the regulation of Colorado's retail and medical marijuana markets, said the tax dollars brought in largely go toward the 'cost of legalization."' He said, "You do not legalize for taxation. It is a myth. You are not SECTION 10: Related Data Page 1144 277 of 669 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol, 3/September 2015 going to pave streets. You are not going to be able to pay teachers. The big red herring is the whole thing that the tax revenue will solve a bunch of crises. But it won't."3 Tax Revenue Doesn't Measure Up: In February 2015, state officials released tax revenue figures from recreational and medical marijuana for 2014 at around $63 minion. "The 15 percent excise tax dedicated for schools - projected alone to raise $40 million - has generated about one-third of the original estimates. Excise taxes totaled $13.3 million from Jan. 1 through Dec. 31 according to data from the Colorado Department of Revenue." Colorado's governor had to drastically modify his $100 million plan for tax revenue. "We ended up with much closer to a $33.5 million budget for this fiscal year," said Andrew Freedman, director of the Governor's Office of Marijuana Coordination. Freedman said the first priority is to cover costs of regulation. Apparently about $7.6 million is needed to enforce regulations and $5,6 million for a statewide public education campaign.4 "Marijuana Taxes Won't Save State Budgets": Colorado Governor John Hickenlooper's office projected $118 million in taxes from recreational marijuana and modified that projection down to $69 million. The Colorado Department of Revenue commissioned report estimated 130 metric tons of marijuana would be consumed in Colorado, but just 77 metric tons were sold through medical or recreational retailers. The rest was sold through an unregulated and untaxed gray market and the black markets The False Promise of Marijuana Money in Education: This article cites a 2014 survey in which more than half the respondents said that the positive to legalization was tax revenue as the greatest benefit. The artide goes on to point out that, of the $40 million earmarked for schools, excise taxes have brought in about half of that.6 SECTION 10: Related Data Page 1 -5 278 of 669 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 3/September 2015 Homeless Number of Beds Provided 100,000 90,000 80,000 70,000 60,000 50,000 40,000 30,000 20,000 10,000 0 Total Overnight Beds Provided, January Through June 2013 2014 SOURCE: The Salvation Army, Intermountain Division Related Material 2015 Denver Shelters Cite Legal Pot in Homeless Upswing:7 There are no records on how many homeless people came to Colorado because of "legal weed." However, homeless centers are seeing an influx, straining their ability to meet the need. • Director Brett Van Sickle of Denver's Salvation Army Crossroads Shelter: "The older ones are coming for medical (marijuana), the younger ones are coming just because it's legal." An informal survey of around 500 new out- of-towners found as many as 30 percent relocated for pot. • Executive Director Tom Luehrs of Denver's Saint Francis Center has seen a big increase in new faces at the shelter and an increase of 50 people a day more in 2014 than 2013. He says many have said they were drawn to Colorado because of legal marijuana. • Urban Peak, which provides services to those ages 15 to 25, saw a 152 percent increase at their drop -in center in just one year. Director Kim Easton said about one-third of the newcomers cite legal marijuana as a factor in moving to Colorado. SECTION 10: Related Data Page 1146 279 of 669 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 3/September 2015 Legal Pot Blamed for Influx of Homeless:8 • Deputy Director Kendall Rames of Urban Peak said, "Of the new kids we're seeing, the majority are saying they're here because of the weed." • Director Melinda Paterson, of Father Woody's Haven of Hope, said, "Typically, they have an attitude. But we are really strict here." She said that normally in the summer Father Woody's gets an increase of 50 people per month but this year more than 300 a month. • The Salvation Army Denver shelter averages went from 225 men to about 300 per night. They are seeing a much larger number of 18 to 25-year-olds. An informal survey suggested about 25 percent of the increase was related to marijuana. • St. Francis Center Executive Director Tom Luehrs says marijuana only trails looking for work among a list of reasons for coming to Colorado. Legalized Recreational Marijuana Use Draws Homeless Texans to Colorado: An article about homelessness and marijuana, published on September 22, 2014 states, "Colorado is seeing a significant increase in the number of homeless people arriving from Texas and the head of two homeless shelters said a big reason for the increase is homeless people wanting to smoke pot." One homeless female from Texas is quoted as saying, "It wasn't the only reason but it was one of the main factors." Another individual from Lubbock, Texas who went to Denver, Colorado says he meets homeless Texans every day that went to Colorado to smoke marijuana. Murray Flagg, of the Salvation Army, said, "We were averaging 190 people a night. Now we are averaging 345 people a night." He goes on to state, "We find about one in four people have come for some marijuana related issue."9 Homeless, Marijuana and Crime: Larimer County (Colorado) Sheriff Justin Smith has noted that, since marijuana was legalized, his agency is experiencing a significant spike in the homeless, transient and sheltered (HTS) population. HTS accounts for approximately 25 percent of county jail inmates. Many of those admit they came to Colorado because marijuana was legalized. The 121 homeless, transient and sheltered inmates generally have not been arrested for petty crime. In reviewing booking charges, it appears only 20 percent could be considered minor crime. Most were arrested for multiple crimes such as:I° • 28 percent - some kind of assault charge • 26 percent - harassment or felony menacing charge • 22 percent - some kind of theft, from burglary to auto theft charge • 13 percent - resisting arrest charge SECTION 10: Related Data Page 1147 280 of 669 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 3/September 2015 Suicide Data NOTE: ON AVERAGE, BETWEEN 2006 — 2013, 95 PERCENT OF ALL SUICIDES HAD TOXICOLOGY RESULTS OF WHICH 8 PERCENT WERE POSITIVE FOR MARIJUANA.36 Su bstanceType Average Toxicology of Suicides Among Adolescents Ages 10 to 19 Years Old, 2009-2013 Marijuana Alcohol Opioid Antidepressent Amphetamine Cocaine 0.0% 2.0% 4.0% 6.0% 8.0% 10.0% 12.0% 14_0% 16.0% 18.0% Percent Positive SOURCE: Colorado Violent Death Reporting System, Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment (CDPEiE) SECTION 10: Related Data Page 1148 281 of 669 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Percent of caseswith toxicology available 35.0% 30.0% 25.0% 20.0% 15.0% 10.0% 5.0% 0.0% Cocaine Vol. 3/September 2015 Average Toxicology Results by Age Group Colorado, 2009-2013 Amphetamine Marijuana Antidepressent SubstanceType °plaid Alcohol ■ Ages 20+ ■ Ages 10-19 SOURCE: Colorado Violent Death Reporting System, Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment (CDPHE) ❖ Marijuana is the only substance where youth ages 10 to 19 years old have a higher percent than adults ages 20 and older. Environmental Impact Pesticides on "Legal" Marijuana Grows: Denver city officials quarantined marijuana plants at eleven legal grow facilities in May of 2015. This quarantine is based on hundreds of millions of dollars' worth of marijuana believed to be contaminated with pesticides.71 Water -Intensive Marijuana Cultivation: An article concerning marijuana cultivation in California, published in the journal Bioscience, revealed that marijuana is an extremely thirsty plant. "In the state's north coast region, about 22 liters of water or more per plant per day is used during the growing season, which lasts from June through October." A co-author pointed out that marijuana grown in the state of Califomia uses nearly twice as much water as wine grapes.12 Side Effects of Legal Marijuana: "Damaged homes have become an epidemic nightmare for the realtors who manage rental properties, who have been left explaining SECTION 10: Related Data Page 1149 282 of 669 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 3/September 2015 to homeowners why black mold has infested their income properties, why their sheetrock has been pulled out and makeshift watering systems installed. Every realtor seems to have a horror story about renting to seemingly fine tenants who are actually quick -profit -making pot entrepreneurs. No insurance company will cover damages from a grow establishment because it is still federally illegal."13 Marijuana Stink Means Property Values Sink: Apparently neighbors in Pitkin County (Colorado) are infuriated by the stench that comes from a marijuana greenhouse.74 Marijuana Electric Demands: "Surging electricity consumption by Colorado's booming marijuana industry is sabotaging Denver's push to use less energy — just as the White House perfects a Clean Power Plan to curb carbon pollution." Apparently Denver's electricity rate is increasing at a rate of 1.2 percent per year and 45 percent of the increase conies from marijuana growing facilities. The growing facilities used 86 million kWh in 2012, 121 million in 2013 and 200 million in 2014.15 Pot Growers and Sky -High Power Bills: "The average indoor grow operation in Denver has a monthly electric bill of $20,000 to $50,000," said Jay Czarkowski, a principal at Canna Advisors, a consulting firm in Boulder." Colorado's marijuana industry uses large amounts of energy for lighting and air conditioning. The owner of one of Colorado's largest cannabis companies said that her utility bill is approximately $40,000 a month. Ron Flax, a building sustainability expert in Boulder, said that the power demand for marijuana growing operations is five times higher than the typical monthly demand of comparable commercial buildings. Evan Mills, an energy analyst and scientist from the Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory, wrote a paper entitled, "Energy Up in Smoke: The Carbon Footprint of Indoor Cannabis Production." Her conclusion was that growing marijuana indoors requires four times more energy than a hospital on a per -square -foot basis and eight times more energy than a typical U.S. commercial building.'6 SECTION 10: Related Data Page 1150 283 of 669 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 3/September 2015 THC Potency Average THC Percent Potency Monitoring Program- Average THC Percent DEA-Submitted Cannabis Samples 1995 - 2013 (National) 14.00% 12.00% 1 10.00% 8.00% 6 00% 3.96% 4.00% -� 2.00% 12.33% 12.55% --11.13% - - — -- 9.58% 9.75% 8.02% 6.11% f1 /yip OE00�° H--_ i I T I I r- T -1 1995 1997 1999 2001 2003 2005 2007 2009 2011 2012 2013 SOURCE: Potency Monitoring Program, Quarterly Report Number 123, National Center for Natural Products Research (NCNRP) at the University of Mississippi, under contract with the National Institute on Drug Abuse. ❖ The 2015 average THC percent for Colorado marijuana is 17.1 percent.'' SECTION 10: Related Data Page 1 151 284 of 669 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 3/September 2015 AverageTHC Percent 60.00°/° T- 50.00% 40.00% 30.00% 20.00% Potency Monitoring Program- Average THC Percent All Submitted Hash Oil Samples 1995 - 2013 (National) 18.20% 28.58% 22.51% 19.44% 31.00% 32.00% 15.540,E 18.74% 24.85% 52.49% 12.71% 0 52.41% — -- — — -- — 6.40% 0.00% -1 -7- -1-- i f T1 i 1 ---f 7 1 i cloi) oil\ ,,,,,,,b 4, ,,,$) ,,,,:s\ p c',) 6,.... ,,, ici 6 c?i ie. '). .N... ..\'1' ..<,) SOURCE: Potency Monitoring Program, Quarterly Report Number 123, National Center for Natural Products Research (NCNRP) at the University of Mississippi, under contract with the National Institute on Drug Abuse. 10 00°t. 16.21% 3 23% 6.73% ❖ The 2015 average THC percent for Colorado concentrate is 62.1 percent." Colorado Marijuana Study Finds Legal Weed Contains Potent THC Levels: "In old -school dope, levels of THC — the psychoactive chemical that makes people high — were typically well below 10 percent. But in Colorado's legal bud, the average THC level is 18.7 percent, and some retail pot contains 30 percent THC or more..." A Denver lab licensed to analyze marijuana samples reports that after 600 samples provided by licensed growers and sellers, they detected little medical value and lots of contamination. "We have been finding some really dirty marijuana," said Andy LaFrate, president of Charas Scientific. He cited fungi and solvents such as butane. He also stated that the 600-plus samples generally carried little or no CBD, the compound that makes medical marijuana "medical." His study shows that the average CBD was 0.1 percent.$ THC Concentrates and Youth: "Now the threat of THC concentrates pose to public health and safety loom large. A new study from researchers at Ohio's Nationwide Children's Hospital finds more American children are exposed to marijuana before reaching their fifth birthday. The report, published in the peer -reviewed journal Clinical SECTION 10: Related Data Page 1152 285 of 669 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 3/September 2015 Pediatrics, found that, between 2006 and 2013, the marijuana exposure rate rose 147.5 percent among children age 5 and under. In that same period, the rate rose nearly 610 percent in states that sanctioned medical marijuana before 2000, the year Colorado followed suit.!"19 Marijuana Use and Alcohol Consumption There are some who have theorized that legalizing marijuana would reduce alcohol consumption. Thus far that theory is not supported by the data. 0 C7 Colorado Average Consumption of Alcohol in Gallons, Per Calendar Year 145,000,000 143,000,030 141,003,000 139,000,000 137,000,000 135,000,000 133,000,000 131,000,000 2011-2012 2013-2014 SOURCE: Colorado Department of Revenue, Colorado Liquor Excise Tax Medical Marijuana Registry Medical Marijuana Registry Identification Cards20 • December 31, 2009 — 41,039 • December 31, 2010 —116,198 • December 31, 2011 — 82,089 • December 31, 2012 —108,526 • December 31, 2013 —110,979 • December 31, 2014 —115,467 SECTION 10: Related Data Page I 153 286 of 669 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 3/September 2015 Profile of Colorado Medical Marijuana Cardholders:2° • 65 percent male, with an average age of 41 years • 23 percent between the ages of 21 and 30 • 66 percent under the age of 50 • 15 percent over the age of 61 • 93 percent reporting severe pain as the medical condition • Only 5 percent reporting cancer, AIDS and glaucoma as the medical condition Percent of Patients Percent of Medical Marijuana Patients Based on Reporting Condition 100% 90%p/ 80% 0% 60% 509/0 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% �e� lea ' �,fi CGa a ca4 64 ce e a SOURCE: Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment, Medical Marijuana Statistics NOTE: TOTAL DOES NOT EQUAL 100 PERCENT AS SOME PATIENTS REPORT USING MEDICAL MARIJUANA FOR MORE THAN ONE DEBILITATING MEDICAL CONDITION. Colorado Licensed Marijuana Businesses as of January 2015 Medical Marijuana:21 • 505 medical marijuana centers ("dispensaries") • 748 marijuana cultivation facilities • 163 infused products (edibles) businesses SECTION 10: Related Data Page 1 154 287 of 669 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 3/September 2015 Recreational Marijuana:22 • 322 marijuana retail stores • 397 marijuana cultivation facilities • 98 infused product (edibles) businesses • 16 testing facilities Business Comparisons, January 2015 Licensed Businesses Colorado Business Comparisons, January 2015 1600 1400 1200 1000 800 600 400 200 McDonalds Starbucks Marijuana Pharmacies Liquor Stores ■ Medical Marijuana Dispensaries t Retail Marijuana Stores SOURCE: Colorado Department of Revenue; Starbucks Coffee Company, Corporate Office Headquarters; McDonalds Corporation, Corporate Office Headquarters SECTION 10: Related Data Page 1155 288 of 669 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact 350 300 250 'y 200 150 100 50 Vol. 3/September 2015 Denver Business Comparisons, January 2015 Pharmades McDonalds Liquor Stores Starbucks Marijuana ■ Medical Marijuana Dispensaries ■ Retail Marijuana Stores SOURCE: Colorado Department of Revenue; Starbucks Coffee Company, Corporate Office Headquarters; McDonalds Corporation, Corporate Office Headquarters ❖ Denver: • 198 licensed medical marijuana centers ("dispensaries")" • 117 pharmacies (as of February 12, 2015)23 Demand and Market Size The Colorado Department of Revenue published a report in July 2014 called, "Market Size and Demand for Marijuana in Colorado."6 Some of the information included: Demand: • In 2014, the established demand for marijuana by Colorado residents 21 years and older is 121.4 metric tons (267,638.44 pounds) of marijuana. • In 2014, the estimated demand for marijuana by out-of-state visitors 21 years and older is 8.9 metric tons (19,620.94 pounds). SECTION 10: Related Data Page 1156 289 of 669 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 3/September 2015 • The potential range of demand for the above two groups is between 104.2 -157.9 metric tons (between 229,719.32 and 348,106.34 pounds). Market Size: • There are an estimated 485,000 Colorado adult regular marijuana users (at least once per month), which is 9 percent of the total Colorado population of all ages (5.363 million). • Heavy users who consume marijuana nearly daily make up the top 21.8 percent of the user population but account for 66.9 percent of the demand for marijuana. • Out-of-state visitors represent about 44 percent of the metro area marijuana retail sale of marijuana and approximately 90 percent of sales in heavily -visited mountain communities. • Colorado has 23 percent of its users consume nearly daily compared to 17 percent nationally; that is 35.29 percent higher. 2014 Reported Sales of Marijuana in Colorado17 • 109,578 pounds of medical marijuana flower • 36,600 pounds of recreational marijuana flower • 1,964,917 units of medical edible products • 2,850,733 units of recreational edible products ❖ A single ounce of marijuana, depending on the solvent type and production method, can produce between 347 and 413 edibles of 10 mg strength. 2014 Price of Marijuana17 1 Gram Ounce Buds/Flowers $14.03 $264.14 Edibles $24.99 (100 mg) N/A Concentrates $55.00 N/A SECTION 10: Related Data Page 1157 290 of 669 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact VoI. 3/September 2015 Local Response to the Medical and Recreational Marijuana Industry in Colorado24 • 321 total local jurisdictions o 228 (71 percent) prohibit any medical or recreational marijuana businesses o 67 (21 percent) allow any medical and recreational marijuana businesses o 26 (8 percent) allow either medical or recreational marijuana businesses, not both Polling August 2015 Smith Johnson Research Poll (Colorado Survey) • In 2012: 51.5 percent favored legalization 48.5 percent opposed legalization • In 2015: 49.2 percent now favor legalization (2.3 percent drop) 50.8 percent now oppose legalization February 2014 October 2014 2013 2014 October 2014 Pew Research Center Poll Favor Legalized Oppose Legalized Unsure 54 percent 52 percent 42 percent 45 percent 3 percent 3 percent October 2014 Gallup Poll Favor Legalized Oppose Legalized Unsure 58 percent 51 percent 39 percent 47 percent 3 percent 2 percent SECTION 10: Related Data Page 1158 291 of 669 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 3/September 2015 September 2014 Suffolk University/USA Today Poll Colorado • 46 percent continue to support Amendment 64 • 50.2 percent do not agree with Amendment 64 decision SOURCE: Polling Report.com Quinnipiac University Poll, February 2015:�5 • 58 percent of Coloradoans polled still support legalizing marijuana for recreational use • 38 percent are opposed •:* November 2012 Amendment 64 election results: • 55 percent in favor • 45 percent opposed Lawsuits Lawsuit Using Federal Racketeering Laws: In February 2015, the Safe Streets Affiance filed a lawsuit on behalf of a horse farm and mountain hotel against two licensed marijuana businesses. The lawsuit, claiming damages, is utilizing the federal Racketeer Influenced and Corruption Organizations (RICO) Act. The lawsuit says, "Marijuana businesses make bad neighbors. They drive away legitimate businesses' customers, emit pungent, foul odors, attract undesirable visitors, increase criminal activity, increase traffic, and reduce property values." Five months after the suit was filed one of the defendants, a medical marijuana retail store, closed.26.27 Colorado, Nebraska and Kansas Sheriffs and Prosecutors File Lawsuit: Twelve sheriffs and prosecutors from Colorado, Nebraska and Kansas have filed a lawsuit as a federal preemption challenge to Colorado's recreational marijuana laws. The lawsuit puts Colorado sheriffs in the position of supporting Colorado's marijuana law in violation of federal law and their oath of office. The out-of-state authorities are citing the challenges and issues of dealing with the diversion of Colorado marijuana into their states.28 SECTION 10: Related Data Page 1159 292 of 669 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 3/September 2015 Colorado Lawsuit Claims Marijuana Edibles Caused People to `Overdose': Seven people filed a suit in Denver after they became sick from eating THC-laced treats manufactured by a licensed edible business. The plaintiffs visiting the Pot Pavilion at the Denver County Fair claimed they were told the chocolates did not contain THC. "A few hours later, though, they were in hospitals complaining about rapid heart rates, passing out, tunnel vision, and other scary symptoms." One of the plaintiffs became so sick that he uncontrollably vomited into his vehicle and was diagnosed at the emergency room as overdosing on THC.29 Fifth Amendment Lawsuit: A pro -marijuana industry attorney, on behalf of several plaintiffs, filed a lawsuit in June of 2014 alleging the payment of sales and excise taxes on the sale of recreational marijuana in Colorado violates the plaintiff's Fifth Amendment rights against self-incrimination.3° Employers Rights to Drug Tests: An employee of Dish Network, LLC filed a lawsuit against the company for having been fired for failing to pass a drug test. The individual, a licensed medical marijuana cardholder, believes he should have the right to possess and use medical marijuana under limited circumstances without fear of being fired from his place of employment.31 Nebraska and Oklahoma Sue Colorado Over Pot: In 2014, the states of Nebraska and Oklahoma filed a lawsuit against Colorado for legalizing recreational marijuana. The lawsuit deals with the diversion of Colorado marijuana to the states of Nebraska and Oklahoma and the burden it places on the two states. Since this is a lawsuit in which a state is suing another state, it goes directly to the Supreme Court.32 Other Issues Too Many "Stoned" Employees: In the spring of 2015, Little Spider Creations' owner is moving his company to South Carolina. The owner claims that, since Colorado legalized marijuana, too many of his employees were coming in high. He said the main reason they are leaving Colorado is that marijuana got into their industry and hall of their sculptors would come to work high. He said, "We went through 25 sculptors. Only five of [our sculptors] either were quality or would show up unimpaired." He says those employees coming to work high were not as productive and tended to have a "it's good enough" attitude. The owner, a native Coloradoan, had 47 full-time employees.33 SECTION 10: Related Data Page 1160 293 of 669 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 3/September 2015 Pot Stores Find Ways of Accepting Credit Cards: Fox31 News (Denver) found that 47 percent of medical marijuana centers polled are allowing the use of credit cards although technically illegal. Apparently these medical retail stores are using holding companies that have legitimate banking relationships. That prevents the banks from knowing they are doing business with marijuana retailers.34 Edible Pot Labels Inaccurate: A study from John Hopkins University shows that more than 80 percent of product labels for marijuana edibles were inaccurate according to researchers. The study, published in the Journal of the American Medical Association, showed that only 17 percent of the labels were accurate to within 10 percent of the actual THC content.35 Sources 1 Matt Kroschel, CBS4 Mountain Newsroom, August 14, 2015, "Panhandling For Pot? Increase May Be Linked to recreational Marijuana/' <http://denver. cbslo cal. corn/2015/0S/14/p anhandling-f or -pat -increase -may -be -linked -to - recreational -marijuana/>, accessed August 14, 2015 2 Colorado Office of State Planning and Budget 3 Bob McGovern, BostonHerald.com, June 12, 2015, "Colorado weed czar: Revenue up in smoke," <http://www.bostonherald.com/news_opinion/local_coverage/2015/06/colorado_weed_ czar_revenue_up_in_smoke>, accessed June 15, 2015 4 The Gazette Op/Ed, March 22, 2015, "No tax windfall from medical, retail sales," <http://gazette.com/no-tax-windfal-from-medical-retail-sales/article/1548295>, accessed April 2, 2015 5 Josh Barro, The New York Times, April 9, 2015, "Marijuana Taxes Won't Save State Budgets," <http://www.nytimes.com/2015/04/09/upshot/09up-marijuana.html?_r=0>, accessed April 13, 2015 6 Marijuana Policy Group for the Colorado Department of Revenue, Executive Summary, "Market Size and Demand for Marijuana in Colorado," July 2014 SECTION 10: Related Data Page 1161 294 of 669 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 3/September 2015 The Associated Press, The New York Times, December 24, 2014, "Denver Shelters Cite Legal Pot in Homeless Upswing," <http://www.nytimes. com/aponline/2014/12/24/us/ap-us-marijuana- homeless.html?_r=0>, accessed August 13, 2015 8 Tom McGhee, The Denver Post, July 26, 2014, "Legal pot blamed for some of influx of homeless in Denver this summer," <http://www.denverpost.com/news/ci_26216037/le gal -pot -blame d-some-influx- homeless-this-summer>, accessed July 26, 2014 9 Jace Larson, Click2Houston.corn, September 22, 2014, "Legalized recreational marijuana use draws homeless Texans to Colorado," <http://www. click2houston. com/news/pot- draws-homeless-texans-to- colorado/28186888>, accessed September 23, 2014 70 Sheriff Justin Smith, "Interesting Info for RMHIDTA," e-mail message, August 20, 2015. " Trevor Hughes, LISAToday, May 15, 2015, "Judge: Pot believed to have pesticide can be seized," <http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2015/05/15/marijuana- pesticide-use-quarantine/27367563/>, accessed May 15, 2015 12 Sarah Yang, Berkeley News, June 24, 2015, "Environment takes big hit from water - intensive marijuana cultivation,"<http://news.berkeley.edu/2015/06/24/marijuana- environmental-impact/>, accessed June 24, 2015 13 Barbara Hardt, May 14, 2015, The Mountain -Ear, "Side Effects of Legal Marijuana," <http://themtnear.com/2015/05/side-effects-of-legal-marijuana/>, accessed May 15, 2015 14 Rick Carroll, The Aspen Times, June 9, 2015, "Residents" Marijuana stink means property values sink," <http://www.aspentimes.com/news/16724245-113/residents- marijuana-stink-means-property-values-sink>, accessed June 9, 2015 15 Bruce Finley, The Denver Post, July 1, 2015, "Marijuana -growing spikes Denver electric demand, challenges clean -power plan," <http ://www.denverpost.com/environment/ci_28417456/p of-boom-spikes-denver- electric-demand-challenges-clean>, accessed July 1, 2015 16 Cathy Proctor, Denver Business Journal, August 7, 2015, "Colorado pot growers face sky-high power bills," <http://www.bizjournals.com/denver/print- SECTION 10: Related Data Page 1162 295 of 669 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 3/September 2015 edition/2015/08/07/colorado-pot-growers-face-sky-high-power-bills.html>, accessed August 7, 2015 77 Colorado Department of Revenue, "Marijuana Equivalency in Portions and Dosage", August 10, 2015 18 Bill Briggs, NBC News, March 23, 2015, "Colorado Marijuana Study Finds Legal Weed Contains Potent THC Levels," <http://www.nbcnews.com/storyline/legal- pot/legal-weed-surprisingly-strong-dirty-tests-find-n327811>, accessed April 8, 2015 19 The Gazette Op/Ed, Sunday, June 21, 2015, "THC extracts concentrate problems," <http: //m. gazette.com/clearing-the-haze-thc-extracts-concentrate- problems/article/1554097>, accessed June 22, 2015 2D Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment, "Medical Marijuana Registry Program Update (as of March 31, 2015)", <http s://www. colorado. goy/pacific/sites/de fault/files/03_2015_%20MMR_report_draf t.p df>, accessed May 15, 2015 21 Colorado Department of Revenue, Enforcement Division 22 John IngoId, The Denver Post, February 20, 2014, "Lot of green will roll in" 23 Colorado Department of Regulatory Agencies, State Board of Pharmacy 24 Colorado Department of Revenue, Enforcement Division — Marijuana, Annual Update, February 27, 2015 25 Quinnipiac University, News and Events, Quinrtipiac University Poll, Release Detail, February 24, 2015, "Colorado, Iowa, Virginia Governors Get Good Grades Quinnipiac University Swing State Poll Finds; Colorado Voters Still High On Legalized Marijuana," <http://www.quinnipiac.edu/news-and-events/quinnipiac-university- poll/search-releases/search-results/release- detail?ReleaselD=2166&What=&strArea=16;28;26;&strTime=12>, accessed February 24, 2015 26 Kristen Wyatt, The Associated Press, February 19, 2015, "Colorado residents are first to ask feds to block legal pot," < http://news.yahoo.corn/colorado-residents-first- ask-feds-block-legal-pot-175909907. finance.html>, accessed February 19, 2015 SECTION 10: Related Data Page 1163 296 of 669 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 3/September 2015 27 Kristen Wyatt, The Associated Press, July 13, 2015, "Marijuana opponents using racketeering law to fight industry," <http://news.yahoo.com/marijuana-opponents- using-racketeering-law-fight-industry-180311017.htm1>, accessed July 13, 2015 28 Monte Stiles, Sheriffs and Prosecutors from CO, NE and KS Announce Federal - Preemption Legal Challenge to Colorado's "Recreational -Marijuana" Law, e-mail message, March 5, 2015 29 John Dyer, Vice News, January 15, 2015, "Colorado Lawsuit Claims Marijuana Edibles Caused People to `Overdose'," <https://news.vice.com/article/colorado-lawsuit- claims-marijuana-edibles-caused-people-to-overdose>, accessed January 15, 2015 3o Drug Enforcement Administration Intelligence Note, August 2014, "Marijuana Taxes vs. the Right Against Self -Incrimination" 31 Brandon Coats, Petitioner vs. Dish Network, LLC, Respondent, Case No. 2013SC394, Supreme Court, State of Colorado, State of Colorado's Amicus Brief in Support of Respondent Dish Network, LLC, filed May 21, 2014 32 Rocky Mountain High Intensity Drug Trafficking Area, 2014 33 USA Today Network and Jen Marnowski, KUSA 9News, April 23, 2015, "Too many high employees prompts company to leave Colorado," , <http://www.ksdk. cam/story/news/nation-now/2015/04/23/too-many-high-employees- prompts-company-to-leave-colorado/26279165/>, accessed April 24, 2015 34 Chris Halsne, Fox31 Denver, April 27, 2015, "Visa for pot: The credit card smokescreen," <http://kdvr.com/2015/04/27/visa-for-pat-the-credit-card-smokescreen/>, accessed May 28, 2015 35 CBC News British Columbia, June 25, 2015, "Most edible pot products labelled with inaccurate THC content, finds new U.S. study," <http ://www.cbc. ca/news/canada/british-columbia/most-edible-pot-pro ducts-labelled- with-inaccurate-thc-content-finds-new-u-s-study-1.3126793>, accessed June 25, 2015 36 Colorado Violent Death Reporting System, Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment (CDPHE) SECTION 10: Related Data Page 1164 297 of 669 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 3/September 2015 SECTION 11: Reference Materials Reports ❑ ANNUAL UPDATE BY THE COLORADO DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE, ENFORCEMENT DIVISION - MARIJUANA, FEBRUARY 27, 2015 This report includes information on the Marijuana Enforcement Division's activities related to medical and recreational marijuana businesses as well as data concerning cultivation and distribution of marijuana by licensed businesses in Colorado. ❑ MARKET SIZE AND DEMAND FOR MARIJUANA IN COLORADO PREPARED FOR THE COLORADO DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE BY THE MARIJUANA POLICY GROUP, MILES K. LIGHT ET AL This report provides estimates for the demand for marijuana and the characteristics of Colorado's market for marijuana. ❑ MARIJUANA EQUIVALENCY IN PORTIONS AND DOSAGE BY THE. COLORADO DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE, AUGUST 2015 This report is an assessment of physical and pharmacokinetic relationships in marijuana products and consumption in Colorado. ❑ MONITORING HEALTH CONCERNS RELATED TO MARIJUANA IN COLORADO: 2014, PUBLISHED BY THE COLORADO DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC HEALTH AND ENVIRONMENT Based on legislative mandate, the Colorado Department of Health and Environment appointed a thirteen -member committee to review the scientific literature on the health effects of marijuana including Colorado -specific outcomes and use data. This report looks at changes in marijuana use in Colorado and also reviews literature on marijuana use and health effects. The committee, in reviewing the literature, judges the findings based on the evidence including categories such as substantial evidence, limited evidence, insufficient evidence, etc. SECTION 11: Reference Materials Page 1165 298 of 669 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 3/September 2015 ❑ COLORADO'S LEGALIZATION OF MARIJUANA AND IMPACT ON PUBLIC SAFETY: A PRACTICAL GUIDE FOR LAW ENFORCEMENT, PUBLISHED BY THE COLORADO ASSOCIATION OF CHIEFS OF POLICE AND THE POLICE FOUNDATION This report focuses on identifying "Colorado's public safety challenges, solutions, and unresolved issues with legalized medical marijuana and recreational marijuana." ❑ POST -LEGALIZATION OF RETAIL MARIJUANA: A STUDY FOCUSING ON EFFECTS OF CRIME, LIVABILITY AND PERCEPTIONS OF CRIME IN THE DENVER METRO AREA, EARLY SUMMER 2015 BY METROPOLITAN STATE UNIVERSITY This report examines crime in Denver and homelessness since the first recreational retail businesses went into effect January 1 2014. ❑ DENVER METRO AREA SENTINEL COMMUNITY EPIDEMIOLOGY REPORT #1, MAY 15, 2015 BY THE DENVER OFFICE OF DRUG STRATEGY, PREPARED BY BRUCE MENDELSON, MPA, DENVER METRO AREA SENTINEL COMMUNITY EPIDEMIOLOGIST This report includes "data collection, analysis, and discussions" regarding alcohol and drug abuse in Denver and the Denver Metro area. ❑ MARIJUANA DATA DISCOVERY AND GAP ANALYSIS SUMMARY REPORT, SEPTEMBER 4, 2014 BY REBOUND SOLUTIONS This report by Rebound Solutions for the state of Colorado analyzes available data to gauge the impact of the legalization of marijuana has on the state of Colorado. This report identifies data, the value of the data and the gaps involved in doing a complete assessment. ❑ HEALTHY KIDS COLORADO SURVEY2013, SEPTEMBER 2014 PREPARED FOR THE COLORADO DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION, COLORADO DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN SERVICES AND COLORADO DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC HEALTH AND ENVIRONMENT BY THE UNIVERSITY OF COLORADO-DENVER COMMUNITY EPIDEMIOLOGY AND PROGRAM EVALUATION GROUP This report collected self -reported health information from Colorado middle to high school students related to a number of issues including drug abuse. ❑ FEDERAL PROPOSALS TO TAX MARIJUANA: AN ECONOMIC ANALYSIS, NOVEMBER 13, 2014 BY THE CONGRESSIONAL RESEARCH SERVICE, JANE G. GRAVELLE, ET AL This report "focuses solely on issues surrounding a potential federal marijuana tax." It provides a brief overview of marijuana production, justification estimate levels of tax and possible marijuana tax designs. SECTION 11: Reference Materials Page 1166 299 of 669 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 3!September 2015 ❑ EXAMINING THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN MARIJUANA USE, MEDICAL MARIJUANA DISPENSARIES, AND ABUSIVE AND NEGLECTFUL PARENTING BY FREISTHLER, B., ET AL. This study examines whether and how current marijuana use, and the physical availability of marijuana, are related to child physical abuse, supervisory neglect, or physical neglect by parents while controlling a child, caregiver or family characteristics in a general population survey in California. ❑ WHAT WILL LEGAL MARIJUANA COST EMPLOYERS, 2014 BY NATIONAL FAMILIES IN ACTION This report covers the impact of legal marijuana on employers dealing with safety, litigation, compliance and productivity. ❑ 1-502 EVALUATION PLAN AND PRELIMINARY REPORT ON IMPLEMENTATION BY WASHINGTON STATE INSTITUTE FOR PUBLIC POLICY, SEPTEMBER 2015 ❑ THE EFFECTS OF CANNABIS USE DURING ADOLESCENCE, 2015 BY THE CANADIAN CENTRE ON SUBSTANCE ABUSE This report covers the impact of marijuana use on youth including the brain, mental illness and addiction. ❑ 'HIGH' ACHIEVERS? CANNABIS ACCESS AND ACADEMIC PERFORMANCE, BY OLIVIER MARIE AND ULF ZOLITZ, INSTITUTE FOR THE STUDY OF LABOR, BONN, GERMANY, MARCH 2015 This report investigates the impact of marijuana on student performance. ❑ RESULTS OF THE 2013-2014 NATIONAL ROADSIDE SURVEY OF ALCOHOL AND DRUG USE BY DRIVERS BY THE NATIONAL HIGHWAY TRAFFIC SAFETY ADMINISTRATION, FEBRUARY 2015 Articles ❑ AMERICAN ACADEMY OF PEDIATRICS REAFFIRMS OPPOSITION TO LEGALIZATION OF MARIJUANA FOR RECREATIONAL OR MEDICAL USE, JANUARY 26, 2015 BY THE AMERICAN ACADEMY OF PEDIATRICS This policy statement opposing the legalization of marijuana also has some recommendations from the American Academy of Pediatrics. SECTION 11: Reference Materials Page 1167 300 of 669 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 3/September 2015 ❑ AMERICAN EPILEPSY SOCIETY PRESIDENT SAYS SIDE EFFECTS OF ARTISANAL CBD OILS CAN BE SO SEVERE NO PEDIATRIC NEUROLOGIST IN COLORADO WILL RECOMMEND THEM, FROM NATIONAL FAMILIES IN ACTION & PARTNERS, THE MARIJUANA REPORT E- NEWSLETTER, JUNE 24, 2015 This article discusses medical marijuana related to CBD. ❑ ANY DOSE OF ALCOHOL COMBINED WITH CANNABIS SIGNIFICANTLY INCREASES LEVELS OF THC IN BLOOD, AMERICAN ASSOCIATION FOR CLINICAL CHEMISTRY, MAY 27, 2015 AS REPORTED IN Sciencefaily This article points to a study for the first time that the use of alcohol and marijuana produces a significantly higher blood concentration of THC than use of marijuana alone. ❑ EVIDENCE LINKING MARIJUANA AND RISK OF STROKE GROWS, AMERICAN HEART ASSOCIATION/NEWSROOM, FEBRUARY 20, 2015 This article reports that smoking marijuana may increase the chance of having a stroke. ❑ MARIJUANA BY THE AMERICAN LUNG ASSOCIATION (WEBSITE) This report discusses the negative impact of marijuana on health and youth. ❑ MARIJUANA AND MADNESS: CLINICAL IMPLICATIONS OF INCREASED AVAILABILITY AND POTENCY, ROBIN M. MURRAY, MD, PROFESSOR OF PSYCHIATRIC RESEARCH AT THE INSTITUTE OF PSYCHIATRY, KING'S COLLEGE LONDON, PSYCHIATRIC TIMES, APRIL 30,2015 In the Psychiatric Times this article discussed use and potency as well as cognitive impairment, psychosis, the developing brain and other implications. ❑ MARIJUANA USE DURING PREGNANCY AND LACTATION, JULY 2015 BY THE AMERICAN COLLEGE OF OBSTETRICIAN AND GYNECOLOGISTS, COMMITTEE ON OBSTETRIC PRACTICE This report discusses the use of marijuana while pregnant, ❑ PROPORTION OF PATIENTS IN SOUTH LONDON WITH FIRST -EPISODE PSYCHOSIS ATTRIBUTABLE TO USE OF HIGH POTENCY CANNABIS: A CASE -CONTROL STUDY, DEFORTI, ET AL, DEPARTMENT OF PSYCHOSIS STUDIES, INSTITUTE OF PSYCHIATRY, KING'S COLLEGE, LONDON, UK, LANCET PSYCHIATRY 2015 In the Lancet Psychiatry 2015 this study investigates how frequent use of high - potency marijuana in south London is associated with psychotic disorders. SECTION 11: Reference Materials Page ! 168 301 of 669 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 3!Septexnber 2015 ❑ STUDY: SCANT EVIDENCE THAT MEDICAL POT HELPS MANY ILLNESSES, JUNE 23, 2015, AP MEDICAL WRITER LINDSEY TANNER, WITH HIGHLIGHTS FROM THE JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN MEDICAL AssoCIATTON This articles states, "Medical marijuana has not been proven to work for many illnesses that state laws have approved it for, according to the first comprehensive analysis of research on its potential benefits." ❑ MARIJUANA STUDY: MEDICAL POT ISN'T PROVEN, BY RICARDO BACA, THE DENVER POST BY RICARDO BACA, THE DENVER POST, JUNE 24, 2014 This article discusses a study published in the Journal of the American Medical Association concerning an analysis involving 6,500 participants that shows marijuana's efficacy regarding most related conditions is unproven. ❑ TEEN CANNABIS USERS HAVE POOR LONG-TERM MEMORY IN ADULTHOOD, MARCH 12, 2015, NORTHWESTERN UNIVERSITY This article discusses heavy teenage marijuana users having abnormally -shaped brain hippocampus that affects long-term memory. ❑ WHAT HAS RESEARCH OVER THE PAST TWO DECADES REVEALED ABOUT THE ADVERSE HEALTH EFFECTS OF RECREATIONAL CANNABIS USE?, WAYNE HALL, THE UNIVERSITY OF QUEENSLAND CENTRE FOR YOUTH SUBSTANCE ABUSE RESEARCH, HERSTON, AUSTRALIA, AUGUST 4, 2014, Addiction, 110. 19-35 This study examines the adverse impact of marijuana on health. SECTION 11: Reference Materials Page 169 302 of 669 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 3/September 2015 THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK SECTION 11: Reference Materials Page 1170 303 of 669 304 of 669 Rocky Mountain High Intensity Drug Trafficking Area Investigative Support Center Denver, Colorado www.rmhidta.org/reports 305 of 669 CPCA Findings on Marijuana Use Brain Development and Public Health • In a paper published on November 10, 2014 in Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, researchers for the first time comprehensively describe existing abnormalities in brain function and structure of long-term marijuana users with multiple magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) techniques. Findings show chronic marijuana users have smaller brain volume in the orbitofrontal cortex (OFC), a part of the brain commonly associated with addiction, but also increased brain connectivity. • In a study published on October 2, 2012 in Proceedings of the National Academy of Science, researchers found that persistent cannabis use was associated with neuropsychological decline broadly across domains of functioning, even after controlling for years of education. Informants also reported noticing more cognitive problems for persistent cannabis users. Impairment was concentrated among adolescent -onset cannabis users, with more persistent use associated with greater decline. Further, cessation of cannabis use did not fully restore neuropsychological functioning among adolescent -onset cannabis users. • In 2011, marijuana accounted for 38 percent of ED visits in which illicit drugs were mentioned (about 450,000 visits, or one for every 40 past -month marijuana users; SAMHSA, 2013a, Table 4); this is a 62-percent increase since 2004 (SAMHSA, 2013a, Table 9). The most common stated reason for these visits is "unexpected reaction" (Kissin and Ball, 2003), which is usually a transient panic attack brought on by extreme intoxication. • Marijuana smoke contains many of the same carcinogens as tobacco smoke (Moir et at, 2008). • According to the National Institute on Drug Abuse/ National Institute of Health, approximately 9 percent, or 1 in 11, of those who use marijuana will become addicted. This rate increases to 17 percent, or about 1 in 6, if you start in your teens. • The Rocky Mountain High Intensity Drug Trafficking Area (HIDTA) reports that ED visits related to marijuana (for those of any age) increased in Colorado by 29 percent in the first year after legalization of personal possession and use (12,888 in 2013 versus 9,982 in 2012), and that was before stores selling recreational marijuana opened. • According to Colorado Public Radio, on April 29, 2014 "The head of the emergency room at one of Denver's largest hospitals says he's seeing more Michaels 2015 306 of 669 people being admitted after consuming large quantities of edible marijuana in the form of cookies or other foods. Dr. Richard Zane, head of the Department of Emergency Medicine at the University of Colorado Hospital, says the increase coincides with the legalization of recreational marijuana...Dr. Zane says University Hospital is admitting about a person a day for pot -related problems, and most are linked to edibles." • According to a doctors account at Colorado's Telluride Medical Center, "I have served in emergency departments for over 15 years. During those first ten years I don't recall treating a single case of an adverse reaction to marijuana. This changed as medicinal marijuana use became more prevalent. Now, after the legalization of recreational marijuana, I'm noticing a dramatic increase in emergency visits related to the drug...The majority of patients reporting marijuana related emergencies at the Telluride Medical Center have the same symptoms: severe nausea and vomiting, anxiety, elevated heart, respiratory and blood pressure rates... A recent study published by the journal JAMA Pediatrics reported a spike in the number of young children treated at Children's Hospital Colorado for accidentally eating marijuana treats. The study found that in the two years after marijuana laws were liberalized in 2009,14 kids were treated for accidental ingestion. In the four years before the change, the study found no children had been hospitalized for accidental ingestion. • According to the 2012 National Survey for Drug Use and Health (conducted by the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services), because they are accessible and available, our legal drugs are used far more than our illegal ones. According to recent surveys, alcohol use is used by 52% of Americans and tobacco is used by 27% of Americans. Marijuana is used by 8% of Americans. • According to the national organization "Smart Approaches to Marijuana," for every $1 in alcohol and tobacco tax revenues, society loses $10 in social costs, from accidents to health damage. o LM Note: unable to find primary source of this statistic. • According to the University of Mississippi Potency -Monitoring Project, since 1983, when the THC concentrations averaged below 5 percent, potency has intensified with today's potency averaging 14% with peek content exceeding 30%. In BHO was it is up to 95% THC Michaels 2015 307 of 669 Impact on Youth • In Colorado, Drug -related suspensions/ expulsions increased 40 percent from school years 2008/2009 to 2013/2014, The vast majority were for marijuana violations (HIDTA). • Legalization diminishes perceived risk of use among high school students. A 2013 study conducted by the Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment found that the percentage of high school students who thought there was moderate or great risk from marijuana declined from 58 percent in 2011 to 54 percent in 2013. • ED episodes involving children are a particular concern. Colorado has experienced an increase in young children admitted to EDs because of accidental ingestion of marijuana infused edibles (e.g., IngoId, 2014b; Wang, Roosevelt, and Heard, 2013). According to an article in The Denver Post published in May 2014, nine children went to just one hospital ED (Children's Hospital Colorado) between January and May 2014, which was more than it saw the entire year before. Seven of the nine were admitted to the hospital's intensive care unit to be watched due to extreme sedation and agitation, and one required a respirator. • In a January 2015 Policy Statement, the American Academy of Pediatrics stated that "The AAP opposes legalization of marijuana because of the potential harms to children and adolescents. The AAP supports studying the effects of recent laws legalizing the use of marijuana to better understand the impact and define best policies to reduce adolescent marijuana use." • In Colorado, there was a 20 percent increase in the percent of 12 to 17 year old probationers testing positive for marijuana since marijuana was legalized for recreational purposes (HIDTA). • Children's Hospital Colorado reported 2 marijuana ingestions among children under 12 in 2009 compared to 16 in 2014 (HIDTA). Drugged Driving • The 2007 National Roadside Survey found that the most prevalent drug detected in the pilot study was marijuana. In 2009, marijuana accounted for 25 percent of all positive drug tests for fatally injured drivers for whom drug -test results were known and 43 percent among fatalities involving drivers 24 years of age and younger with known drug -test results. • Downey (2012) finds that the increase of THC dosage alone influences perception of what is a safe distance to leave between cars. Furthermore, differences in the Michaels 2015 308 of 669 amount of "straddling the solid line," "straddling the barrier line," "insufficient stopped clear space" occur when THC was consumed (rather than a placebo). • Li (2011) finds that drivers who test positive for marijuana or sell -report using marijuana are more than twice as likely as other drivers to be involved in motor vehicle crashes • Bosker (2012) finds that cannabis is significantly related to performance on the one -leg stand test. • According to a May 2014 Denver Post article, in 2011, the proportion of drivers in fatal crashes in Colorado testing positive for marijuana had risen to 10 percent — up from 5.9 percent in early 2009. o LM Note: Even with a 5 nanograr per se in Colorado, drugged driving has increased. Black Market Activity • PBS recently did a program on black market activity in Colorado, "One of the benefits attached to legalization was that it would eliminate the black market. But that market is still thriving, according to a 39 year old marijuana grower who asked us to call him John Doe and to conceal his identity because he sells on the underground market.... John Doe says Iow-income buyers turn to the black market because prices are higher at legal retail stores. There's conflicting information, but an ounce of pot on the black market can cost as little as $180. At the store Andy Williams owns, you have to pay around $240 for an ounce...The illegal trade is doing especially well in black and Latino communities, and he says it works the same way it did when pot was illegal." • According to an April 2014 Washington Times article, legalization has done nothing more than enhance the opportunity for the black market. • During 2009 - 2012, when medical marijuana was commercialized, the yearly average number of interdiction seizures of Colorado marijuana increased 365 percent from 52 to 242 per year. During 2013 - 2014, when recreational marijuana was legalized, the yearly average interdiction seizures of Colorado marijuana increased another 34 percent from 242 to 324 (HIDTA). • The average pounds of Colorado marijuana seized, destined for 36 other states, increased 33 percent from 2005 - 2008 compared to 2009 - 2014 (HIDTA). • U.S. mail parcel interceptions of Colorado marijuana, destined for 38 other states, increased 2,033 percent from 2010 - 2014 (HIDTA). • Pounds of Colorado marijuana seized in the U.S. mail, destined for 38 other states, increased 722 percent from 2010 - 2014 (HIDTA). Michaels 2015 309 of 669 Our Penal System • As of Januaryl, 2011 possession of one ounce or less of marijuana is an infraction punishable by a maximum $100 fine with no criminal record under CA Health and Safety Code 11357b. • According to the Office of the Attorney General, there were 13,779 marijuana - related felony arrests in California in 2013, compared to 85,035 "dangerous drug" related felony arrests. Because personal possession is an infraction, these felony arrests apply to illicit sale and illicit cultivation (meaning sale and cultivation occurring outside of permitted medical marijuana activity). Michaels 2015 310 of 669 ADDITIONAL REFERENCES AND SOURCES: Research Report Series: Marijuana," National Institute of Health, National Institute on Drug Abuse; July 2012. For quick reference, see "Drug Facts: Marijuana": National Institute of Health, National Institute on Drug Abuse; January 2014, available at: https://www.drugabuse.gov/publicationsfdrugfacts/marijuana. California Healthy Kids Survey Research Report Series: Marijuana," National Institute of Health, National Institute on Drug Abuse; July 2012. For quick reference, see "Drug Facts: Marijuana": National Institute of Health, National Institute on Drug Abuse; January 2014, available at: https://www.drugabuse.gov/publications/drugfacts/marijuana. http://www.acpeds.org/marijuana-use-detrimental-to-youth http://www.rmhidta. org/html/2015%20FINAL%2OLEGALIZATION%200F%20MARIJUANA %20IN%2000LORADO%20THE%20IMP ACT.pdf ARIZONA REFERENCES "Research Report Series: Marijuana," National Institute of Health, National Institute on Drug Abuse; July 2012. For quick reference, see "Drug Facts: Marijuana": National Institute of Health, National Institute on Drug Abuse; January 2014, available at: https://www.drugabuse.gov/publications/drugfacts/marijuana. "Arizona Youth Survey: State Report," Arizona Criminal Justice Commission, 2012; p. 32. For quick reference, see "Arizona Youth Survey 2012: Marijuana Data Brief" "Research Report Series: Marijuana," National Institute of Health, National Institute on Drug Abuse; July 2012. "Drug Facts: Marijuana": National Institute of Health, National Institute on Drug Abuse; January 2014, available at: https://www.drugabuse.gov/publicationsfdrugfacts/marijuana Meier, Madeline H.; Caspi, Avshalom, et. al., "Persistent Cannabis Users Show Neuropsychological Decline From Childhood to Midlife," Proceeding of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America", vol. 109 no. 40; October 2, 2012. Calkins, Kathryn, "Early Onset, Regular Cannabis Use Is Linked to IQ Decline," National Institute on Drug Abuse; August 13, 2013. Accompanying video presentation by Dr. Madeline Meier, located at: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gJXnxHYapbE. "Marijuana's Lasting Effects on the Brain," National Institute on Drug Abuse; March 2013. "Heavy marijuana users have abnormal brain structure and poor memory," Science Codex; December 6, 2013. "Heavy marijuana users have abnormal brain structure and poor memory," Science Codex; December 6, 2013. ,. "Arizona Youth Survey: State Report," Arizona Criminal Justice Commission, 2012; p. 58. "Two New Studies Conclude Marijuana Use Connected to College Failure," Community Anti -Drug Coalitions of America; March 28, 2013. 311 of 669 Two New Studies Conclude Marijuana Use Connected to College Failure," Community Anti - Drug Coalitions of America; March 28, 2013. "Is there a link between marijuana use and mental illness?" National Institute on Drug Abuse; July 2012. MacDonald, Ann, "Teens who smoke pot at risk for later schizophrenia, psychosis," Harvard Health; March 7, 2011. Bergland, Christopher, "Heavy Marijuana Use Alters Teenage Brain Structure," Psychology Today; December 16, 2013. "" "Research Report Series: Marijuana," National Institute of Heal Health, National Institute on Drug Abuse; July 2012. For quick reference, see "Drug Facts: Marijuana": National Institute of Health; National Institute on Drug Abuse; January 2014, available at: https://www.drugabuse.gov/publicationsfdrugfactsimarijuana. "Arizona Youth Survey: State Report," Arizona Criminal Justice Commission, 2012. For quick reference, see "Arizona Youth Survey 2012: Marijuana Data Brief."This prediction by the Arizona Criminal Justice Commission is an extrapolation based on the date included in the "Arizona Youth Survey: State Report," Arizona Criminal Justice Commission, 2012. ' "Research Report Series: Marijuana," National Institute of Health, National Institute on Drug Abuse; July 2012. For quick reference, see "Drug Facts: Marijuana": National Institute of Health, National Institute on Drug Abuse; January 2014, available at: https://www.drugabuse.gov/publicationsidrugfactsimarijuana. "How cannabis suppresses immune functions: cannabis compounds found to trigger unique immune cells which promote cancer growth," Wiley -Blackwell, ScienceDaily; November 26, 2010. "Drug Facts: Drugged Driving," National Institute of Health, National Institute on Drug Abuse; October 2013. 1" "Drug Facts: Drugged Driving," National Institute of Health, National Institute on Drug Abuse; October 2011" "The Public Health Consequences of Marijuana Legalization," White House Fact Sheet. Kilmer, Beau, et al., "Altered States? Assessing How Marijuana Legalization in California Could Influence Marijuana Consumption and Public Budgets," RAND Corp.; 2010. "Marijuana in the Workplace," University of Washington, Alcohol & Drug Abuse Institute; August 2013. "' "The Public Health Consequences of Marijuana Legalization," White House Fact Sheet. 312 of 669 ORDINANCE NO. 2016 — AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF NATIONAL CITY ADDING CHAPTER 10.14 TO TITLE 10 OF THE NATIONAL CITY MUNICIPAL CODE TO PROHIBIT ALL COMMERCIAL MARIJUANA ACTIVITY IN THE CITY OF NATIONAL CITY, REGULATE THE CULTIVATION OF RECREATIONAL MARIJUANA FOR PERSONAL USE, AND REGULATE THE POSSESSION OF RECREATIONAL MARIJUANA IN ANTICIPATION OF PROPOSITION 64, THE CONTROL, REGULATE, AND TAX ADULT USE OF MARIJUANA ACT ("AUMA"), PASSING ON NOVEMBER 8, 2016 WHEREAS, National City is committed to the success and positive future of its community youth, and to the health and safety of its residents; and WHEREAS, National City supports efforts to decrease and prevent youth use of and exposure to non -medical marijuana and other drugs; and WHEREAS, marijuana use can be harmful to the adolescent brain, affecting the parts of the brain that influence pleasure, memory, thinking, concentration, sensory and time perception, and coordinated movement; and WHEREAS, a ballot measure titled the "Adult Use of Marijuana" to permit commercial sales of non -medical marijuana in California will be on the November 2016 General Election ballot; and WHEREAS, analysis of the "Adult Use of Marijuana" initiative by the San Diego District Attorney's office points out, "The initiative allows persons convicted of dealing large amounts of controlled substances such as heroin (up to 20,000 individual doses), methamphetamine (up to 10,000 individual doses) to become `legal marijuana dealers"; and WHEREAS, the analysis further notes that the initiative permits convicted felony drug dealers who have used children to courier drugs to an adult buyer to be eligible to apply for a California marijuana license; and WHEREAS, there are no provisions in the initiative to prevent advertising and marketing to children and teens near parks, community centers, child -focused businesses, and community colleges; and WHEREAS, the High Intensity Drug Trafficking Areas ("HIDTA") statistics for marijuana use in Colorado teens ages 12-17 are 74% above the national average; and WHEREAS, the initiative allows for the indoor growing of up to six marijuana plants per residence and each plant requires 6 gallons of water per day in a state that is currently battling a drought; and WHEREAS, in Colorado, where non -medical marijuana is legal and commercialized, marijuana -related traffic deaths increased 92% from 2010 to 2014 while all traffic deaths increased only 8 percent during the same time period; and 313 of 669 WHEREAS, a study released in May 2016 by AAA Foundation for Traffic Research found that fatal crashes involving drivers who recently used marijuana doubled in Washington after the state legalized the drug; and WHEREAS, National City is highly concerned of the likelihood of a severe increase in fatal crashes or incidents involving drivers who recently used marijuana should marijuana be legalized in the State of California. NOW THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of National City does ordain as follows: Section 1. Title 10 of the National City Municipal Code is amended by adding Chapter 10.14 to read as follows and shall take effect if Proposition 64, the Control, Regulate, and Tax Adult Use of Marijuana Act ("AUMA") passes on November 8, 2016: Chapter 10.14 RECREATIONAL MARIJUANA Sections: 10.14.010 Definitions. 10.14.020 Commercial marijuana activity — Prohibited. 10.14.030 Cultivation of recreational marijuana for personal use. 10.14.040 Possession of recreational marijuana. 10.14.050 Smoking of marijuana in public - Prohibited. 10.14.060 Penalties. 10.14.070 Enforcement. 10.14.080 Non -exclusivity. 10.14.090 Severability. 10.14.010 Definitions. A. For purposes of this chapter, "marijuana" shall have the same meaning as the definition of that word in Section 11018 of the California Health and Safety Code. B. "Commercial marijuana activity" includes the cultivation, possession, manufacture, distribution, processing, storing, laboratory testing, labeling, transportation, distribution, delivery, or sale of marijuana and marijuana products. C. "Cultivation of marijuana" shall mean the planting, growing, cultivating, harvesting, drying, curing, grading, trimming or processing of marijuana as defined in Business and Professions Code section 26001. D. Delivery means the commercial transfer of marijuana or marijuana products to a customer. Delivery also includes the use by a retailer of any technology platform owned and controlled by the retailer, or independently licensed, that enables customers to arrange for or facilitate the commercial transfer by a licensed retailer of marijuana or marijuana products as defined in Business and Professions Code section 26001(h). Ordinance No. 2016 - 2 Adding Chapter 10.14 to prohibit all 2016 commerical marijuana activity in National City 314 of 669 E. "Marijuana accessories" shall have the same meaning as section 11018.2 of the Health and Safety Code. Any equipment, products, or materials of any kind which are used, intended for use, or designed for use in planting, propagating, cultivating, growing, harvesting, manufacturing, compounding, converting, producing, processing, preparing, testing, analyzing, packaging, repackaging, storing, smoking, vaporizing, or containing marijuana, or for ingesting, inhaling, or otherwise introducing marijuana or marijuana products into the human body. F. "Marijuana cultivation facility" means an entity licensed to cultivate, prepare, and package marijuana and sell marijuana to retail marijuana stores, to marijuana product manufacturing facilities, and to other marijuana cultivation facilities, but not to consumers. G. "Marijuana establishment" means a marijuana cultivation facility, a marijuana testing facility, a marijuana product manufacturing facility, or a retail marijuana store. H. "Marijuana product manufacturing facility" means an entity licensed to purchase marijuana; manufacture, prepare, and package marijuana products; and sell marijuana and marijuana products to other marijuana product manufacturing facilities and to retail marijuana stores, but not to consumers. "Marijuana products" means concentrated marijuana products and marijuana products that are comprised of marijuana and other ingredients and are intended for use of consumptions, such as, but not limited to, edible products, ointments and tinctures and as otherwise defined in section 11018.1 of the Health and Safety Code. J. "Marijuana storage facility" means any entity or premise used for the storage or marijuana, marijuana products or marijuana accessories. K. "Marijuana testing facility" means an entity licensed to analyze and certify the safety and potency of marijuana. L. "Private Residence" means a house, an apartment unit, a mobile home, or other similar habitable dwelling as defined in Health and Safety Code section 11362.2(b)(5). M. "Retail marijuana store" includes any entity licensed to purchase marijuana from marijuana cultivation facilities and marijuana and marijuana products from marijuana product manufacturing facilities and to sell marijuana and marijuana products to consumers; or any premises, whether licensed or unlicensed, where marijuana, marijuana products, or devices for the use of marijuana or marijuana products are offered, either individually or in any combination, for retail sale, including an establishment that delivers marijuana and marijuana products as part of a retail sale. 10.14.020 Commercial marijuana activity - Prohibited. The licensing and/or operation of marijuana cultivation facilities, marijuana product manufacturing facilities, marijuana testing facilities, marijuana delivery businesses, marijuana storage facilities, retail marijuana stores, marijuana establishments, or any commercial marijuana activity is prohibited. 10.14.030 Cultivation of recreational marijuana for personal use. A. Outdoor Cultivation. The cultivation of marijuana outdoors is prohibited regardless of purpose. B. Indoor Cultivation. Not more than six plants may be cultivated, planted, harvested, dried, processed or possessed within a single private residence at one time per Health and Safety Code section 11362.2(a). Ordinance No. 2016 - 3 Adding Chapter 10.14 to prohibit all 2016 commerical marijuana activity in National City 315 of 669 10.14.040 Possession of recreational marijuana. A. It is unlawful for a person under the age of twenty-one (21) years to possess, transfer, transport or purchase marijuana, marijuana products, marijuana accessories. B. It is unlawful for any person to display, consume, sell, or use marijuana in or upon any public area, public park, or public building. C. It is unlawful for any person to purchase marijuana or marijuana products for consumption or possession by, or otherwise provide marijuana for consumption or possession by, or to sell marijuana to, any person under the age of twenty-one (21) years. 10.14.050 Smoking of marijuana in public - Prohibited. A. General Prohibition. The smoking of marijuana is prohibited anywhere the smoking of tobacco is prohibited. B. Smoking of marijuana shall be prohibited as stated in Health and Safety Code section 11362.3. 10.14.060 Penalties. A. General Penalty. In addition to any other penalties that may exist under state, federal, and local laws, a violation of any provision of this chapter or a failure to comply with any mandatory requirements of this chapter is subject to prosecution in accordance with Title 1 of the National City Municipal Code and may be enforced through injunctive relief or other relief available by law. Penalties for violations of the provisions of this chapter may result in a misdemeanor citation for each day in violation, punishable by a maximum of one year in jail and a one thousand dollar fine. B. Public Nuisance. The conduct of any activity or business in violation of this chapter is declared to be a public nuisance and the city may, in addition to all other remedies set forth hereunder, commence an action or actions or proceedings, for the abatement, removal and enjoinment thereof, in a manner provided by the law; and may take such other steps and may apply to such court or courts as may have jurisdiction to grant such relief as will abate or remove such marijuana cultivation facility, marijuana product manufacturing facility, marijuana testing facility, marijuana delivery business, marijuana storage facility, retail marijuana store, marijuana establishment, or any commercial marijuana activity and restrain and enjoin any person from operating, conducting or maintaining such a business or establishment contrary to the provisions of this chapter. C. Cost Recovery. Administering departments are authorized to charge cost recovery fees for services provided under this chapter. Cost recovery fees may also be recovered for equipment and personnel expenses incurred. Said fees may be established from time to time by resolution of the city council. 10.14.070 Enforcement. The provisions of this chapter shall be enforced by the fire marshal, any police officer, any code compliance officer, and any other city official authorized to enforce any provision of the municipal code. 10.14.080 Non -exclusivity. Nothing in this chapter shall limit or preclude the enforcement of other applicable laws. Ordinance No. 2016 - 4 Adding Chapter 10.14 to prohibit all 2016 commerical marijuana activity in National City 316 of 669 10.14.090 Severability. The provisions of this chapter are declared to be separate and severable. The invalidity of any clause, sentence, paragraph, subdivision, section, or portion of this chapter, or the invalidity of the application thereof to any person or circumstance shall not affect the validity of the remainder of this chapter, or the validity of its application to other persons or circumstances. PASSED and ADOPTED this day of , 2016. Ron Morrison, Mayor ATTEST: Michael R. Dalla, City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: George H. Eiser, III Interim City Attorney Ordinance No. 2016 - 5 Adding Chapter 10.14 to prohibit all 2016 commerical marijuana activity in National City 317 of 669 CC/CDC-HA Agenda 10/18/2016 — Page 318 The following page(s) contain the backup material for Agenda Item: An Urgency Ordinance of the City Council of the City of National City Pursuant to California Government Code Sections 36934 and 36937 adding Chapter 10.14 to Title 10 of the National City Municipal Code to Prohibit all Commercial Marijuana Activity in the 318 of 669 CITY OF NATIONAL CITY, CALIFORNIA COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT MEETING DATE: October 18, 2016 AGENDA ITEM NO. ITEM TITLE: An Urgency Ordinance of the City Council of the City of National City Pursuant to California Government Code Sections 36934 and 36937 adding Chapter 10.14 to Title 10 of the National City Municipal Code to Prohibit all Commercial Marijuana Activity in the City of National City, Regulate the Cultivation of Recreational Marijuana for Personal Use, and Regulate the Possession of Recreational Marijuana in anticipation of Proposition 64, the Control, Regulate, and Tax Adult Use of Marijuana Act ("AUMA"), passing on November 8, 2016. PREPARED BY: Nicole Pedone PHONE: Ext. 4221 EXPLANATION: Please see attached staff report, DEPARTMENT: APPROVED BY: FINANCIAL STATEMENT: APPROVED: ACCOUNT NO. APPROVED: Not applicable. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW: This activity is not a project as defined in Section 15378 of the California Code of Regulations; therefore, no further action is required under the California Environmental Quality Act. ORDINANCE: INTRODUCTION: FINAL ADOPTION: Finance MIS STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Introduce proposed ordinance. Requires 4/5 vote. BOARD / COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION: Not applicable. ATTACHMENTS: Staff Report Exhibit 1 - Memorandum written by the League of California Cities Exhibit 2 - Rocky Mountain High Drug Trafficking Area Report Exhibit 3 - California Police Chiefs Association Findings on Marijuana Use Exhibit 4 - Additional References and Sources 319 of 669 +}- CA.iFORNIA NATIONAL etry INCORPORATED City Council Staff Report October 18, 2016 ITEM An Urgency Ordinance of the City Council Pursuant to California Government Code Sections 36934 and 36937 adding Chapter 10.14 to Title 10 of the National City Municipal Code to Prohibit all Commercial Marijuana Activity in the City of National City, Regulate the Cultivation of Recreational Marijuana for Personal Use, and Regulate the Possession of Recreational Marijuana in anticipation of and contingent upon Proposition 64, the Control, Regulate, and Tax Adult Use of Marijuana Act ("AUMA"), passing on November 8, 2016. If this proposed urgency ordinance is approved, it would become effective and be in force if the AUMA passes on November 8, 2016. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Introduce Urgency Ordinance to add Chapter 10.14 to Title 10 of the National City Municipal Code to Prohibit all Commercial Marijuana Activity in the City of National City, Regulate the Cultivation of Recreational Marijuana for Personal Use, and Regulate the Possession of Recreational Marijuana in anticipation of Proposition 64, the Control, Regulate, and Tax Adult Use of Marijuana Act ("AUMA"), passing on November 8, 2016 to be effective in the event AUMA passes on November 8, 2016. Adoption of an Urgency Ordinance requires a 4/5 vote of the City Council. BACKGROUND AND OVERVIEW OF THE CONTROL, REGULATE, AND TAX ADULT USE OF MARIJUANA ACT ("AUMA") The following background information is largely taken from a memorandum written by the League of California Cities1 (the entirety of the memorandum as well as a chart is attached as Exhibit 1): The League of California Cities mission statement reads as follows: "To expand and protect local control for cities through education and advocacy to enhance the quality of life for all Californians." © 2016 League of California Cities 320 of 669 On November 8, 2016, AUMA will come before California voters as Proposition 64. If passed, the AUMA will legalize the nonmedical use of marijuana by persons 21 years of age and over, and the personal cultivation of up to six marijuana plants. In addition, the AUMA will create a state regulatory and licensing system governing the commercial cultivation, testing, and distribution of nonmedical marijuana, and the manufacturing of nonmedical marijuana products. A. Personal Nonmedical Marijuana Use The AUMA makes it legal for persons 21 years of age or older to: (1) smoke or ingest marijuana or marijuana products; (2) possess, process, transport, purchase, obtain, or give away to persons 21 years of age or older, without any compensation, 28.5 grams of marijuana, or 8 grams of concentrated marijuana, including as contained in marijuana products; and (3) possess, plant, cultivate, harvest, dry or process up to six living marijuana plants for personal use.2 The AUMA requires that marijuana in excess of 28.5 grams that is produced by plants kept pursuant to the personal cultivation provision of the Act be kept in a locked space on the grounds of a private residence that is not visible from a public place.3 Although persons 21 years of age or older may use and possess nonmedical marijuana under the Act, their ability to engage in these activities is not unfettered. The AUMA prohibits the smoking of marijuana: (1) in any public place, except where a local jurisdiction has authorized use on the premises of a retailer or microbusiness in accordance with Business and Professions Code section 26200; (2) where smoking tobacco is prohibited; (3) within 1,000 feet of a school, day care center, or youth center while children are present; and (3) while driving, or riding in the passenger seat of, any vehicle used for transportation.4 Moreover, individuals cannot possess marijuana on school grounds, in day care centers, or in youth centers while children are present, or possess an open container of marijuana or marijuana products while driving, operating, or riding in any vehicle used for transportation.5 The AUMA further provides that cities may prohibit possession and smoking in buildings owned, leased, or occupied by the city, and that employers, including cities, may maintain a drug and alcohol free workplace by prohibiting the use, consumption, possession, transfer, transportation, sale, display or growth of marijuana in the workplace.6 B. Personal Cultivation The AUMA provides that local governments can reasonably regulate, but cannot ban, personal indoor cultivation of up to six living marijuana plants within the person's private residence.? The Act defines private residence as "a house, an apartment unit, a 2 Health & Safety Code §11362.2(a) Health & Safety Code § 11362.2(a)(2) 4 Health & Safety Code § 11362.3(7)-(8) 5 Health & Safety Code §11362.3(3), 11362.3(4) G Health & Safety Code §11362.45(f)-(g) 7 Health & Safety Code §11362.1(a)(3), 11362.2 Staff Report Ordinance Adding Chapter 10.14 321 of 669 mobile home, or other similar dwelling unit."8 This includes cultivation in a greenhouse on the same property as the residence that is not physically part of the home, as long as it is fully enclosed, secure, and not visible from a public space.9 The AUMA completely protects the ability of local governments to regulate, and to ban, personal outdoor cultivation operations.1° However, it purports to repeal any ordinance that bans outdoor cultivation upon the California Attorney General's determination that nonmedical use of marijuana is lawful under federal law." C. Commercial Nonmedical Marijuana Activity Under the AUMA, California will have a comprehensive state regulatory system for nonmedical marijuana that governs the industry from "seed to sale." The Bureau of Marijuana Control, currently the Bureau of Medical Cannabis Regulation, which is within the Department of Consumer Affairs, will have primary responsibility for administering and enforcing the AUMA.12 The AUMA divides state licensing and enforcement responsibilities among three agencies: (1) the Department of Consumer Affairs, which will issue licenses for the transportation, storage, distribution, and sale of marijuana;13 (2) the Department of Food and Agriculture will issue marijuana cultivation licenses, which will administer the provisions of the AUMA related to the cultivation of marijuana;14 and (3) the Department of Public Health, which will issue licenses for marijuana manufacturers and testing laboratories.15 Each of these state licensing authorities is responsible for creating regulations governing their respective areas of responsibility, and must begin issuing licenses by January 1, 2018.i6 A state marijuana license will be valid for one year.17 A separate state license is required for each commercial marijuana business location.18 With the exception of testing facilities, any person or entity licensed under the AUMA may apply for and be issued more than one type of state license.19 S Health & Safety Code §11362.2(5) 9 Health & Safety Code §11362.2(a)(2) 10 Health & Safety Code § 11362.2(b)(3) 11 Health & Safety Code §11362.2(b)(4) 12 Business & Professions Code §26010 13 Business and Professions Code § 26012(a)(1) 14 Business and Professions Code § 26012(a)(2) 15 Business and Professions Code § 26012(3) 16 Business and Professions Code § 26012(c), 26013(a) 17 Business and Professions Code § 26050(c) 18 Business and Professions Code § 26055(c) 19 Business and Professions Code § 26053 Staff Report Ordinance Adding Chapter 10.14 322 of 669 D. Local Control All nonmedical marijuana businesses must have a state license.2° A state license cannot issue to an applicant whose operations would violate the provisions of any local ordinance or regulation.' However, a state applicant need not provide documentation that the applicant has a local license or permit. The AUMA does not limit the authority of a local jurisdiction to adopt and enforce local ordinances regulating or completely prohibiting state -licensed marijuana businesses.22 Local jurisdictions may establish "standards, requirements, and regulations regarding health and safety, environmental protection, testing, security, food safety, and worker protections that exceed state standards."23 E. Local Enforcement AUMA establishes a dual enforcement scheme for commercial marijuana activities that violate either state or local laws. The state licensing authorities will enforce state statutes and regulations. State authorities can suspend or revoke state licenses,24 pursue civil penalties against violating businesses in an amount equal to three times the applicable licensing fee per violation,25 or may prosecute violators criminally.26 Local authorities will be responsible for enforcing local ordinances and regulations.27 For state -licensed facilities operating within a city, a city may have authority to enforce state law and regulations "if delegated the power to do so by the [B]ureau [of Marijuana Control] or a licensing authority."28 The AUMA does not require an applicant to provide evidence of local permission prior to being issued a state license.29 Instead, the AUMA prohibits state licensing entities from approving licenses for activities that would violate local ordinances.3° Thus, state licensing officials bear the onus of evaluating local regulatory compliance. PROPOSED ORDINANCE Chapter 10.14, titled "Recreational Marijuana" would be added to Title 10, Public Peace, Morals, and Safety under section III. titled Offenses Against Health and Safety. This ordinance would prohibit all commercial marijuana activity in the city including the licensing and operation of any marijuana cultivation facilities, marijuana product 20 Business and Professions Code § 26038 21 Business and Professions Code § 26055(e) 22 Business and Professions Code § 26200(a); but see, Business and Professions Code §§ 19340(f), 26080(b), 26090(c) which prohibits cities from preventing the use of public roads to lawfully transport or deliver nonmedical marijuana. 23 Business and Professions Code § 26201 za Business and Professions Code § 2603 25 Business and Professions Code § 26038(a) 26 Business and Professions Code § 26038(c) 27 Business and Professions Code § 26200(b) 28 Business and Professions Code § 23202(a) 29 Business and Professions Code § 26056 i0 Business and Professions Code § 26055(e) Staff Report Ordinance Adding Chapter 10.14 323 of 669 manufacturing facilities, marijuana testing facilities, marijuana delivery businesses, marijuana storage facilities, retail marijuana stores, and marijuana establishments. All outdoor cultivation of marijuana would also be prohibited and in accordance with proposed Health and Safety code section 11362.2(a), not more than six plants may be cultivated within a single private residence. The possession, display, consumption, sale or use of recreational marijuana will be prohibited in or upon any public area, public park and public building and the smoking of marijuana will prohibited anywhere the smoking of tobacco is prohibited and as otherwise prohibited in proposed Health and Safety section 11362.3. The ordinance will also make it unlawful for any person to purchase marijuana or to sell to any person under the age of 21 years old. If this proposed urgency ordinance is approved, it would become effective and be in force in the event AUMA passes on November 8, 2016. ENFORCEMENT Violations of this ordinance could result in prosecution in accordance with Title 1 of the National City Municipal Code and may be enforced through injunctive relief or any other relief available by law, including civil or criminal prosecution. Penalties may result in a misdemeanor citation for each day in violation, punishable by a maximum of one year in jail and a one thousand dollar fine. Violations of the ordinance are declared to be a public nuisance and may be abated by the City in accordance with the law and as provided for under the National City Municipal Code. Enforcement efforts will be done by a combination of police officers, code compliance Officers, the fire marshal, or any other city official authorized to enforce any provision of the municipal code. URGENCY ORDINANCE This ordinance is necessary for the immediate preservation of the public peace, health, and safety due to the impending vote on November 8, 2016 in which Proposition 64 is anticipated to pass with a majority vote legalizing the recreational use of marijuana. The city already bans all medical marijuana dispensaries and cultivation regardless of purpose. The cultivation, transportation, distribution, and sale of recreational marijuana can create problems related to crime, public health, and safety, water and air quality and energy consumption. Marijuana creates nuisance activity such as loitering and criminal activity in business and residential districts. In addition, equipment utilized to grow marijuana indoors can pose a risk of fire. The negative impacts of the legalization of recreational marijuana are significant as documented by the findings after Colorado legalized marijuana. 31 31 See attached Rocky Mountain High Drug Trafficking Area (RMHIDTA) September 2015 (Volume 3) Report, Exhibit 2. Staff Report Ordinance Adding Chapter 10.14 324 of 669 • Impaired Driving o a 32% increase in marijuana -related traffic deaths in 2014, when retail marijuana businesses began operating, there was in just one year from 2013. a 92% increase from 2010-2014 in marijuana -related traffic deaths 8% for all other traffic deaths in that period. o 45°%o increase in positive marijuana results of active THC results for primarily driving under the influence since 2014, when retail marijuana business began operating. • Youth Marijuana Use o 11.16% of Colorado youth ages 12 to 17 years old were considered current marijuana users compared to 7.15% nationally in 2013. o Colorado ranked 3rd in the nation and was 56% higher than the national average. o 40% increase during the school years 2008 — 2014 in Drug -related suspensions / expulsions, the majority were marijuana violations. o A 2015 survey of school resource and school counselors revealed similar results about increased marijuana issues since recreational marijuana was legalized. • Adult Marijuana Use o 29% of college age students (18-25 years old) in 2013, were considered current marijuana users compared to 18.91 % nationally. o Colorado ranked 2nd in the nation, 54% higher than the national average. o 10.13% of adults ages 26 years and up in 2013 were considered current marijuana uses compared to 5.45% nationally. Colorado ranked 5th in the nation for current marijuana use among adults (85.87 percent higher than the national average). o 49°/a increase of probationers age 18 to 25 years old, were positive for THC. 87% increase in marijuana users ages 26 and older since it was legalized. • Emergency Room Admissions o a 29% increase in the number of marijuana -related emergency room visits and 38% increase in marijuana -related hospitalizations in one year In 2014, when retail marijuana businesses began operating. o a 46% increase in hospitalizations related to marijuana in the three years after medical marijuana was commercialized, compared to the three years prior. o Children's Hospital Colorado reported 16 cases of marijuana ingestions among children under 12 in 2014, compared to 2 in 2009. Staff Report Ordinance Adding Chapter 10.14 325 of 669 • Marijuana -related Exposure Issues o In 2014, when retail marijuana businesses began operating, marijuana - only related exposures increased by 72% in one year. o During the years 2013-2014, the average number of all age exposures was 175 per year. Exposures have doubled since marijuana was legalized in Colorado. o Young children (0-5 years old): 2013-2014, average of 31 exposures per year. • Overall, crime in Denver increased 12.3% from 2012 to 2014. o Colorado increase in marijuana tourism industry. o Huge growing black market and criminal enterprise (15% increase in violent crime). o Residential homes rented specifically for grow use. o Increase in Utilities Theft. o Pesticides / Environmental Impact. o Increased use in public events. o Increase Expenses for citizens (vehicle / health insurance, rental prices) o Not enough revenue to areas impacted for regulation (cities / counties that opt out). In addition, a study released in May 2016 by AAA Foundation for Traffic Research found that fatal crashes involving drivers who recently used marijuana doubled in Washington State after that state legalized the drug. An analysis of the "Adult Use of Marijuana" initiative by the San Diego District Attorney's office points out, "The initiative allows persons convicted of dealing large amounts of controlled substances such as heroin (up to 20,000 individual doses), methamphetamine (up to 10,000 individual doses) to become `legal marijuana dealers'; and the analysis further notes that the initiative permits convicted felony drug dealers who have used children to courier drugs to an adult buyer to be eligible to apply for a California marijuana license. Further, there are no provisions in the initiative to prevent advertising and marketing to children and teens near parks, community centers, child -focused businesses, and community colleges. Besides the increase in crime, deaths, and increased exposure of the drug to our youth, the legalization of the drug presents serious implications to our environment. For instance, each plant requires 6 gallons of water per day in a state that is currently battling a drought and asking residents to conserve. This urgency ordinance is urged for the health and safety of our residents, and in order to commit to the success and positive future of our community youth.32 FISCAL IMPACT None 32 See attached California Police Chiefs Association Findings on Marijuana Use, Exhibit 3, and additional resources and sources, Exhibit 4. Staff Report Ordinance Adding Chapter 10.14 326 of 669 LEAIG JE® CITIES 1400 K Street, Suite 400 • Sacramento, California 95814 Phone: 916.658.8200 Fax: 916.658.8240 www.cacities.org MEMORANDUM' To: League of California Cities' City Managers Department League of California Cities' City Attorneys Department From: League Staff Date: September 26, 2016 Re: The Control, Regulate and Tax Adult Use of Marijuana Act On November 8, 2016, the Control, Regulate, and Tax Adult Use of Marijuana Act ("AUMA" or "Act") will come before California voters as Proposition 64. If passed, the AUMA will legalize the nonmedical use of marijuana by persons 21 years of age and over, and the personal cultivation of up to six marijuana plants. In addition, the AUMA will create a state regulatory and licensing system governing the commercial cultivation, testing, and distribution of nonmedical marijuana, and the manufacturing of nonmedical marijuana products. The regulatory system governing these commercial marijuana activities largely mirrors the Medical Marijuana Regulation and Safety Act ("MMRSA"), but there are key differences. This memorandum will provide an overview of the AUMA, highlight the ways in which the AUMA differs from the MMRSA, and identify the issues that cities will need to take action on if the AUMA passes. I. Overview of the AUMA A. Personal Nonmedical Marijuana Use The AUMA makes it legal for persons 21 years of age or older to: (1) smoke or ingest marijuana or marijuana products; (2) possess, process, transport, purchase, obtain, or give away to persons 21 years of age or older, without any compensation, 28.5 grams of marijuana, or 8 grams of concentrated marijuana, including as contained in marijuana products; and (3) possess, plant, cultivate, harvest, dry or process up to six living marijuana plants for personal use.2 The AUMA requires that marijuana in excess of 28.5 grams that is produced by plants kept pursuant to the personal cultivation provision of the Act be kept in a locked space on the grounds of a private residence that is not visible from a public place.3 Although persons 21 years of age or older may use and possess nonmedical marijuana under the Act, their ability to engage in these activities is not unfettered. The AUMA prohibits the smoking I DISCLAIMER: These materials are not offered as or intended to be legal advice. Readers should seek the advice of an attorney when confronted with legal issues. Attorneys should perform an independent evaluation of the issues raised in these materials. 2 Health & Saf. Code § 11362.2(a). 3 Health & Saf. Code § 11362.2(a)(2). 1 327 of 669 of marijuana: (1) in any public place, except where a local jurisdiction has authorized use on the premises of a retailer or microbusiness in accordance with Business and Professions Code section 26200; (2) where smoking tobacco is prohibited; (3) within 1,000 feet of a school, day care center, or youth center while children are present; and (3) while driving, or riding in the passenger seat of, any vehicle used for transportation.4 Moreover, individuals cannot possess marijuana on school grounds, in day care centers, or in youth centers while children are present, or possess an open container of marijuana or marijuana products while driving, operating, or riding in any vehicle used for transportation.5 The AUMA further provides that cities may prohibit possession and smoking in buildings owned, leased, or occupied by the city, and that employers, including cities, may maintain a drug and alcohol free workplace by prohibiting the use, consumption, possession, transfer, transportation, sale, display or growth of marijuana in the workplace.6 1. Personal Cultivation The AUMA provides that local governments can reasonably regulate, but cannot ban, personal indoor cultivation of up to six living marijuana plants within the person's private residence.' The Act defines private residence as "a house, an apartment unit, a mobile home, or other similar dwelling unit."8 This includes cultivation in a greenhouse on the same property as the residence that is not physically part of the home, as long as it is fully enclosed, secure, and not visible from a public space.9 The AUMA completely protects the ability of local governments to regulate, and to ban, personal outdoor cultivation operations.'° However, it purports to repeal any ordinance that bans outdoor cultivation upon the California Attorney General's determination that nonmedical use of marijuana is lawful under federal law.' B. Commercial Nonmedical Marijuana Activity Under the AUMA, California will have a comprehensive state regulatory system for nonmedical marijuana that governs the industry from "seed to sale." The Bureau of Marijuana Control, currently the Bureau of Medical Cannabis Regulation, which is within the Department of Consumer Affairs, will have primary responsibility for administering and enforcing the AUMA.' 2 The AUMA divides state licensing and enforcement responsibilities among three agencies: (1) the Department of Consumer Affairs, which will issue licenses for marijuana the transportation, 4 Health & Saf. Code §§ 11362.3; 11362.4. 5 Health & Saf. Code §§ 11362.3(3), 11362.3(4). 6 Health & Saf. Code § 11362.45 (t)-(g). ' Health & Saf. Code §§ 11362.1(a)(3), 11362.2. 8 Health & Saf. Code § 11362.2(5). 9 Health & Saf. Code § 11362.2(a)(2). 10 Health & Saf. Code § 11362.2(b)(3). 11 Health & Saf. Code § 11362.2(b)(4). 12 Bus. & Prof. Code § 26010. 2 328 of 669 storage, distribution, and sale of marijuana;13 (2) the Department of Food and Agriculture will issue marijuana cultivation licenses, which will administer the provisions of the AUMA related to the cultivation of marijuana;14 and (3) the Department of Public Health, which will issue licenses for marijuana manufacturers and testing laboratories.15 Each of these state licensing authorities is responsible for creating regulations governing their respective areas of responsibility, and must begin issuing licenses by January 1, 2018.' A state marijuana license will be valid for one year.17 A separate state license is required for each commercial marijuana business location.'$ With the exception of testing facilities, any person or entity licensed under the AUMA may apply for and be issued more than one type of state license.19 1. Local Control All nonmedical marijuana businesses must have a state license.20 A state license cannot issue to an applicant whose operations would violate the provisions of any local ordinance or regulation.21 However a state applicant need not provide documentation that the applicant has a local license or permit. The AUMA does not limit the authority of a local jurisdiction to adopt and enforce local ordinances regulating or completely prohibiting state -licensed marijuana businesses.22 Local jurisdictions may establish "standards, requirements, and regulations regarding health and safety, environmental protection, testing, security, food safety, and worker protections that exceed state standards."23 2. Local Enforcement Like the MMRSA, the AUMA establishes a dual enforcement scheme for commercial marijuana activities that violate either state or local laws. The state licensing authorities will enforce state statutes and regulations, State authorities can suspend or revoke state licenses,24 pursue civil penalties against violating businesses in an amount equal to three times the applicable licensing fee per violation,25 or may prosecute violators criminally.26 Local authorities will be responsible 13 Bus. & Prof. Code § 26012(a)(1). 14 Bus. & Prof. Code § 26012(a)(2). 15 Bus. & Prof. Code § 26012(3). 16 Bus. & Prof. Code §§ 26012(c), 26013 (a). 17 Bus. & Prof. Code § 26050(c). 18 Bus. & Prof. Code § 26055(c). 19 Bus. & Prof. Code § 26053. 20 Bus. & Prof. Code § 26038.) 21 Bus. & Prof. Code § 26055(e). 22 Bus. & Prof. Code § 26200(a). But see, Bus. & Prof. Code §§ 19340(f), 26080(b), 26090(c) [prohibiting cities from preventing the use of public roads to lawfully transport or deliver nonmedical marijuana]. 23 Bus. & Prof. Code § 26201. 24 Bus. & Prof. Code § 2603. 25 Bus. & Prof. Code § 26038(a) 26 Bus. & Prof. Code § 26038(c). 3 329 of 669 for enforcing local ordinances and regulations.27 For state -licensed facilities operating within a city, a city may have authority to enforce state law and regulations "if delegated the power to do so by the [B]ureau [of Marijuana Control] or a licensing authority."28 II. Key Differences Between the AUMA and MMRSA A. Licensing The MMRSA established dual licensing of medical marijuana businesses, requiring both local approval and a state license in order for a business to operate legally.29 Specifically, the MMRSA requires applicants to provide the relevant state licensing entity with documentation proving their compliance with local ordinances and regulations.3° The AUMA does not require an applicant to provide evidence of local permission prior to being issued a state license.31 Instead, the AUMA prohibits state licensing entities from approving licenses for activities that would violate local ordinances.32 Thus, state licensing officials bear the onus of evaluating local regulatory compliance. Under this system, the AUMA allows a nonmedical marijuana business licensed by the state to operate within city limits unless the city's municipal code prohibits the use. Cities that wish to regulate or prohibit nonmedical marijuana businesses will need to do so before the State begins issuing licenses, either by enacting a nonmedical marijuana ordinance/regulation or by amending an existing medical marijuana ordinance/regulation to include nonmedical marijuana within its scope. B. License Revocation Under the MMRSA, revocation of a local license or permit unilaterally terminates the ability of the medical marijuana business to operate in the jurisdiction issuing the permit, until such time as the local permitting entity reinstates it.33 Under the AUMA, if a local jurisdiction revokes a local license, permit, or authorization for a licensee to engage in commercial marijuana activity within the local jurisdiction, the Bureau of Marijuana Control must initiate proceedings to determine whether the state license issued should be suspended or revoked within ten days of being notified by the local jurisdiction of the local revocation.34 Note, however, that, even if the state license is not suspended or revoked immediately, the business cannot operate within the local jurisdiction once local revocation occurs. 27 Bus. & Prof. Code § 26200 (b). 28 Bus. & Prof. Code § 23202(a). 29 Bus. & Prof. Code § 19320(b). 3° Bus. & Prof. Code § 19322(a). 31 Bus. & Prof. Code § 26056. 32 Bus. & Prof. Code § 26055(e). 33 Bus. & Prof. Code § 19320(d). 34 Bus. & Prof. Code § 26200(c). 4 330 of 669 C. Personal, Indoor Cultivation Under the MMRSA, local governments possess the power to regulate and completely ban personal, indoor cultivation.35 Under the AUMA local governments can "reasonably regulate" indoor cultivation of up to six marijuana plants for personal use, but cannot ban it.36 D. Personal Outdoor Cultivation Under the MMRSA local governments can prohibit all outdoor cultivation. Under the AUMA local governments can prohibit all outdoor cultivation, until such time as the Attorney General determines that the use of nonmedical marijuana is lawful in the State of California under federal law.37 Upon such determination, the AUMA purports to repeal all local bans on outdoor cultivation.38 E. Amendment Any portion of the MMRSA can be amended at any time, if there is sufficient political support within the Legislature for making substantive changes to the regulatory structure. Under some circumstances, an amendment to the MMRSA by the Legislature might arguably violate The Compassionate Use Act of 1996 (adopted by the voters as Proposition 215), which decriminalized the personal use of medical marijuana.39 Under the AUMA, the Legislature may amend Sections 5 (relating to the use of medical marijuana for medical purposes) and 6 (relating to state licensing) and the provisions relating to penalties by majority vote. The Legislature may amend any other provision of the Act by a 2/3 vote. Any amendment must further the purposes and intent of the AUMA. The purpose and intent of the Act include allowing local governments to ban nonmedical marijuana businesses. F. Taxation The AUMA imposes new state taxes on medical and nonmedical marijuana in the following manner: Effective January 1, 2018, the AUMA imposes an excise tax at the rate of 15% of gross retail sales receipts.4° o This tax will be in addition to existing state and local sales tax.41 Given that state and local sales taxes can range from 7-10%, the combined excise tax + sales tax at the retail level could approach 25%; 35 Health & Saf. Code § 11362.777(g); Maral v. City of Live Oak (2013) 221 Cal.App.4th 975, 984; Kirby v. County of Fresno (2015) 242 Ca1.App.4th 940, 969-970. 36 Bus. & Prof. Code § 11362.2(b)(1). 37 Bus. & Prof. Code § 11362.2(b)(4). 38 Bus. & Prof. Code § 11362.2(b)(4). 39 Health & Saf. Code § 11362.5. 4D Rev. & Tax Code § 34011(a). 5 331 of 669 • Effective January 1, 2018, the AUMA imposes a separate cultivation tax on all harvested marijuana as follows:42 o $9.25 per dry -weight ounce on all marijuana flowers; o $2.75 per dry -weight ounce on all marijuana leaves; • The AUMA prohibits imposition of state and local sales taxes on medical marijuana.43 • The AUMA exempts marijuana cultivated for personal use from taxation.44 The AUMA does not pre-empt local taxation.45 However, the AUMA's estimated cumulative tax rate of nearly 35% on the purchase of nonmedical marijuana has potentially troubling implications for local governments. A high state tax rate by itself may depress sales and stimulate the black market. Any local taxation of marijuana should be governed by an awareness that a high retail sales tax rate, unposed on an industry that, until recently, has not been regulated at all, might stimulate black market activity and compromise the anticipated yield of revenue. In order to avoid such a result, cities might consider imposing an excise tax on discrete commercial nonmedical marijuana activities rather than on retail sales. New taxes on marijuana require compliance with Proposition 218. 1. Allocation of State Tax Revenues After repaying certain state agencies for marijuana regulatory costs not covered by license fees, and making certain grants to universities for research and development and the Governor's Office of Business and Economic Development, the AUMA distributes the remaining tax revenue as follows: • 60% for youth programs, substance abuse education, prevention and treatment; • 20% for environmental cleanup and remediation; and • 20% for state and local programs that reduce DUI and grant programs designed to reduce negative health impacts resulting from marijuana legalization G. Deliveries Under the MMRSA, medical marijuana deliveries can only be made from a state -licensed dispensary in a city, county, or city and county that does not explicitly prohibit it by local ordinance.46 A delivery person must carry a copy of the dispensary's state -issued license, a government ID, and a copy of the delivery request.47 The patient or caregiver requesting the delivery must also maintain a copy of the delivery request.48 Dispensaries and delivery people who comply with MMRSA are immune from prosecution for marijuana transportation. 9 41 Rev. & Tax Code § 34011(d). 42 Rev. & Tax Code § 34012. 43 Rev. & Tax Code § 34011(g). 44 Rev. & Tax Code § 34012(j). 45 Rev. & Tax Code § 34021. 46 Bus. & Prof. Code § 19340(a). 47 Bus. & Prof. Code §§ 19340(b)(2), 19340(d). 48 Bus. & Prof. Code § 19340(e). 49 Bus. & Prof. Code § 19317(f). 6 332 of 669 Under the AUMA, deliveries can be made by a state -licensed retailer, microbusiness, or nonprofit unless they are prohibited by local ordinance.50 Although the AUMA does require a customer requesting delivery to maintain a copy of the delivery request, there is no express requirement that delivery people carry or maintain any records.51 Moreover, unlike the MMRSA, the AUMA does not require that deliveries come from a dispensary. Instead, it states that "Deliveries, as defined in this division, may only be made by a licensed retailer or microbusiness, or a licensed nonprofit under Section 26070.5."52 Thus, there is at least some question regarding whether deliveries may be made from non -retail locations by retail employees. Under both the MMRSA and the AUMA, local jurisdictions can ban or regulate deliveries within their borders.53 However, local jurisdictions cannot prevent a delivery service from using public roads to simply pass through its jurisdiction from a licensed dispensary to a delivery location outside of its boundaries.54 III. Local Regulatory Options55 The AUMA preserves the authority of a city to adopt business regulations and land use regulations for nonmedical marijuana activities.56 A. Personal Marijuana Cultivation Under the AUMA local governments can regulate or ban all personal, outdoor cultivation, until such time as the Attorney General determines that the use of nonmedical marijuana is lawful in the State of California under federal law. In addition, local governments can "reasonably regulate," but cannot ban, personal, indoor cultivation. Nothing in the AUMA requires a city to enact an ordinance or regulation by a certain date. However, assuming that the AUMA passes, if a city does not have a ban or regulatory scheme governing personal, outdoor cultivation or a regulatory scheme governing personal, indoor cultivation in place before November 9, 2016, a person may legally engage in personal cultivation of up to six marijuana plants at his or her private residence. 5o Bus. & Prof. Code §26090(a). 51 Bus. & Prof. Code §26090(b). 52 Bus. & Prof. Code § 26090(a). 53 Bus. & Prof. Code §§ 19340(a), 19316(a), 26200. 54 Bus. & Prof. Code §§ 19340(f), 26080(b), 26090(c). 55 For a thorough discussion of the various marijuana regulatory options that a city may consider, see McEwen, Medical Marijuana -Revisited After New State Laws (Spring 2016) <http://www.cacities.org/Resources- D o cuments/Member-Engagement/Professional-Departments/City-Attorneys/Library/2016/Spring-2016/5-2016- Spring-Medical-Marijuana-%E2%80%93-Revisited-After>. In addition, sample ordinances may be found on the League's website, at: http://www.cacities.org/Policy-Advocacy/Hot-Issues/Medical-Marijuana. But note: the regulatory schemes discussed in the McEwen paper and posted on the League's website pertain to medical marijuana businesses under the MMRSA and may need to be modified to comply with the requirements of the AUMA. 56 Health & Saf. Code § 11362.2; Bus. & Prof. Code §§ 26201, 26200(a). 7 333 of 669 B. Nonmedical Marijuana Businesses The AUMA recognizes a range of businesses, including dispensaries, cultivators, manufacturers, distributors, transporters, and testing laboratories. Cities may expressly ban, adopt business regulations, or adopt land use regulations pertaining to any or all of these businesses. Again, the AUMA does not require a city to enact a regulatory scheme or ban by a certain date. However, assuming that the AUMA passes in November, if a city wishes to regulate or ban marijuana businesses before marijuana businesses may legally operate within the city, the regulations or ban will need to take effect before the state begins issuing nonmedical marijuana business licenses. The League anticipates that cities have until January 1, 2018 to enact bans or regulations relating to nonmedical marijuana businesses, because: (1) nonmedical marijuana businesses cannot operate in any city without a state license;57 (2) the state licensing agencies in charge of implementing the AUMA have stated that they anticipate that they will not begin issuing licenses under the MMRSA until January 2018, and it is unlikely that said agencies will be able to begin issuing licenses under the AUMA before they begin issuing licenses under the MMRSA; and (3) the AUMA does not require state agencies to issue licenses until January 1, 2018.58 It is not the League's position that state licensing agencies cannot issue licenses before January 1, 2018, just that it is unlikely that they will do so. C. Caution Against Use of Permissive Zoning Under a permissive zoning code, any use not enumerated in the code is presumptively prohibited, unless an authorized city official finds that the proposed use is substantially the same in character and intensity as those land uses listed in the code.59 Although the MMRSA upheld a city's authority to rely on permissive zoning to prohibit medical marijuana land uses, it is unlikely that cities will succeed in arguing that nonmedical marijuana land uses are prohibited by permissive zoning under the AUMA. This is so because: (1) the statutory language in the AUMA regarding local control seems to anticipate that a city will adopt an ordinance explicitly prohibiting and/or regulating nonmedical marijuana businesses (rather than relying on the silence of its Code to argue for a prohibited use);G° (2) the AUMA does not contain the same protective language as the S7 Bus. & Prof. Code § 26038. 58 Bus. & Prof. Code § 26012 (c). 59 See City of Corona v. Naulls (2008) 166 Ca1.App.4th 418, 433-436. See also County of Los Angeles v. Hill (2011) 192 Ca1.App.4th 861, 871 [holding that "medical marijuana dispensaries and pharmacies are not `similarly situated' for public health and safety purposes"]; City of Monterey v. Carrnshimba (2013) 215 Ca1.App.4th 1068, 1091 [holding that a medical marijuana dispensary was not substantially similar to the listed commercial use classifications for personal services, retail sales, pharmacies and medical supplies]; County of Tulare v. Nunes (2013) 215 Ca1.App.4th 1188, 1205 [holding that a medical marijuana collective did not qualify as an "agricultural" land use because "marijuana is a controlled substance and is not treated as a mere crop or horticultural product under the law"]. 60 Bus. & Prof Code § 26200 ["Nothing in this division shall be interpreted to supersede or limit the authority of a local jurisdiction to adopt and enforce local ordinances to regulate businesses licensed under this division, including, but not limited to, local zoning and land use requirements, business license requirements, and requirements related 8 334 of 669 MMRSA with respect to permissive zoning;61 and (3) the AUMA explicitly designates nonmedical marijuana as an agricultural product —thus if a city's permissive zoning code authorizes agricultural uses, the city may be precluded from arguing that marijuana is prohibited.62 Therefore, cities that wish to ban all or some nonmedical marijuana activities should adopt express prohibitions, even if they operate under a permissive zoning code. IV. What actions need to be taken? At this time city officials should: (1) review the city's municipal code; (2) consider whether they wish to regulate the personal cultivation of nonmedical marijuana indoors; (3) consider whether they wish to regulate or ban the personal cultivation of nonmedical marijuana outdoors; (4) consider whether they wish to enact business regulations of nonmedical marijuana businesses; (5) consider whether they wish to enact land use regulations of nonmedical marijuana businesses; (6) consider whether they wish to enact local taxes on marijuana; and (7) comply with Proposition 218 if they decide to enact local taxes on marijuana. Cities should prioritize considering or enacting ordinances regulating personal nonmedical marijuana cultivation, because it will be legal under state law on November 9, 2016 if the AUMA passes, whereas nonmedical marijuana businesses will not be able to operate lawfully until the state licensing system becomes operational (likely in late 2017). Although cultivation for personal use will be legal as of November 9, 2016 if the AUMA is approved by voters, local governments will not lose any regulatory authority if they do not have an ordinance in place addressing personal cultivation before the election. Locals will retain the ability to regulate personal cultivation and to enact related ordinances at any time after the election. The only change the AUMA will make in this area is to prohibit local bans of indoor cultivation for personal use. No ordinance enacted prior to the election can prevent this change in the law. to reducing exposure to second hand smoke, or to completely prohibit the establishment or operation of one or more types of businesses licensed under this division within the local jurisdiction."] (emphasis added). 61 Compare Health & Saf. Code § 11362.777(b)(3) [a "person or entity shall not submit an application for a state license ... if the proposed cultivation of marijuana will violate the provisions of any local ordinance or regulation, or if medical marijuana is prohibited by the city, county, or city and county in which the cultivation is proposed to occur, either expressly or otherwise under principles of permissive zoning"] with Bus. & Prof Code § 26205(e) ["Licensing authorities shall not approve an application for a state license under this division if approval of the state license will violate the provisions of any local ordinance or regulation adopted in accordance with Section 26200."]. 62 Bus. & Prof. Code § 26067(a). 9 335 of 669 ADULT USE OF MARIJUANA ACT (AUMA) PROVISIONS DIRECTLY AFFECTING CITY AUTHORITY PERSONAL USE NON -MEDICAL and MEDICAL Possession of no more than 28.5 grams of marijuana or 8 grams of marijuana products Cities cannot prohibit or regulate' Cultivation of 6 plants Cities can prohibit OUTDOOR cultivation; Cannot prohibit INDOOR cultivation but can reasonably regulate2 No Smoking Where smoking tobacco prohibited; within 1,000 feet of school, day care center, or youth center; driving automobile or boat; possess on school grounds, day care center, youth center3 City Facilities May prohibit possession and smoking in building owned, leased, or occupied by city4 City as Employer May maintain a drug and alcohol free workplace and not required to permit or accommodate the use, consumption, possession, transfer, transportation, sale, display, or growth of marijuana in the workplaces BUSINESS (COMMERCIAL CANNABIS) REGULATIONS6 NON -MEDICAL MEDICAL Local Land Use Regulation May prohibit or regulate variety of land uses7 May prohibit or regulate variety of land uses (see fn. 6) Local Bans/Regulation/Licensing May prohibit or regulate activities licensed by state (see fn. 6) May prohibit or regulate activities licensed by state (see fn. 6)8 Person can't submit application for state license unless has received license, permit, or authorization from local government9 Local Regulation of Delivery May prohibit or regulate but can't prohibit use of city streets10 Must explicitly prohibit11 Local Environmental; Health; Safety; Testing; Security Cities may adopt stricter standards than state minimum standards12 TAXATION'S NON -MEDICAL MEDICAL State /Local: Sales Tax YES NO14 Other Local Taxes'$ YES YES State excise tax (15%) on purchasers; shared with public safety agencies. YES YES May 23, 2016 336 of 669 State cultivation tax ($9.25 per dry - weight ounce of flowers; $2.75 per dry -weight ounce of leaves); shared with public safety agencies. YES YES 1 H&S 11362.1(a) 2 H&S 11362.2(b). AUMA requires marijuana produced by plants in excess of 28.5 grams to be kept within private residence in a locked space that is not visible from a public place. H&S 11362.3. Smoking of marijuana is prohibited in all of these locations. a H&S 11362.45(g) H&S 11362.45(f) 6 The AUMA establishes a licensing scheme for nonmedical marijuana businesses (B&P 26000 and following). Existing law (B&P §19320 and following) establish a licensing scheme for medical marijuana businesses. Businesses covered are delivery, transportation, manufacture, cultivation, retailer, distributor and testing service. 7 B&P 26200 8 EXCEPTION: Cities must explicitly prohibit delivery (B&P 19340(b)(1)) 9 B&P 19322 10 EXCEPTION: Cities may not prohibit use of public streets for delivery (H&S 26090(c)) 11 B&P 19340(b)(1) 12 B&P 19316; 26201. 13 The AUMA imposes an excise tax on the purchase of marijuana and a cultivation tax on the cultivation of marijuana. la R&T 34011(d) 15 R&T 34021 May 23, 2016 337 of 669 THE LEGALIZATION OF MARIJUANA IN COLORADO THE IMPACT 338 of 669 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 3/September 2015 PREPARED BY: INTELLIGENCE ANALYST KEVIN WONG INTELLIGENCE ANALYST CHELSEY CLARKE 339 of 669 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 3/September 2015 Acknowledgements Thank you to all who provided case examples and information for the "related materials" sections of this report. Also, thanks to all the agencies that were so cooperative in providing data used in this report; specifically: • El Paso Intelligence Center • National Highway Traffic Safety Administration • National Center for Natural Products Research • Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration • United States Custom and Border Protection • United States Postal Inspection Service • Colorado Bureau of Investigation • Colorado Department of Education • Colorado Department of Human Services, Office of Behavioral Health • Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment • Colorado Department of Transportation • Colorado Office of State Planning and Budgeting • Colorado State Patrol • Colorado Violent Death Reporting System • Colorado Department of Revenue • Marijuana Enforcement Division • Rocky Mountain Poison and Drug Center • State of Colorado Judicial Branch, Division of Probation Services • University of Colorado Hospital - Burn Trauma Unit • Aurora Police Department • Boulder Police Department • City and County of Denver • Denver Epidemiology Working Group • Denver Police Department • Larimer County Sheriff's Office • Arapahoe House Public Communications Office • ChemaTox Laboratory • Colorado Association of School Resource Officers • Colorado Children's Hospital • Colorado Hospital Association • Colorado School Counselors Association • McDonalds Corporate Office • Starbucks Coffee Company Corporate Office • The Salvation Army Acknowledgements 340 of 669 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 3/September 2015 THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK 341 of 669 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 3/September 2015 Table of Contents Acknowledgements Executive Summary 1 Introduction 7 Purpose 7 The Debate 7 Background 8 Preface 8 Colorado's History with Marijuana Legalization 9 Early Medical Marijuana 2000-2008 9 Medical Marijuana Commercialization and Expansion 2009-Present 9 Recreational Marijuana 2013-Present 11 SECTION 1: Impaired Driving 13 Introduction 13 Definitions 13 Some Findings 14 Data for Traffic Deaths 15 Total Number of Statewide Traffic Deaths 16 Marijuana -Related Traffic Deaths 16 Average Number of Traffic Deaths Related to Marijuana 17 Traffic Deaths Related to Marijuana 17 Percent of All Traffic Deaths That Were Marijuana Related 18 Operators Testing Positive for Marijuana 18 Average Number of Operators Testing Positive for Marijuana 19 Percent of Operators Tested Who Were Positive for Marijuana 19 Drug Combinations for Operators Testing Positive for Marijuana 20 Data for Impaired Driving 20 Trends in Cannabinoid Screens & THC Confirmations in Colorado 2009-2014 21 Number of Cannabinoid Screens 22 Number of Positive Cannabinoid Screens 22 Number of Positive Cannabinoid Screens with Active THC 23 Colorado State Patrol Number of DUIDs, 2014 24 Denver Police Department Number of DUIDs Involving Marijuana 25 Aurora Police Department Number of DUIDs, 2014 25 Table of Contents i 342 of 669 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 3/September 2015 Larimer County Sheriff's Office Percent of DUIDs Involving Marijuana 26 Number of DUI Admissions to Arapahoe House with Marijuana as a Self -Reported Drug of Choice 26 Total Number of Accidents in Colorado 27 Related Costs 27 Drug Recognition Experts 28 Case Examples and Related Material 28 Sources 32 SECTION 2: Youth Marijuana Use 35 Introduction 35 Some Findings 35 Data 37 Colorado Average Past Month Use of Marijuana Ages 12 to 17 Years Old 37 Youth (Ages 12 to 17 Years Old) Past Month Marijuana Use National vs. Colorado 37 Prevalence of Past 30-Day Marijuana Use, 12 to 17 Years Old, 2006-2012 (U.S., Denver Metro and Colorado) 38 National Average Past Month Use by 12 to 17 Years Old, 2013 38 State by State Past Month Usage by 12 to 17 Years Old, 2013 39 Top and Bottom States for Past Month Marijuana Use Youth (12 to 17 Years Old), 2013 40 Drug -Related Suspensions/Expulsions 40 Average Drug -Related Suspensions/Expulsions 41 Percentage of Total Suspensions in Colorado from 2004-2014 School Years 42 Percentage of Total Expulsions in Colorado from 2004-2014 School Years 42 Percentage of Total Referrals to Law Enforcement in Colorado from 2004-2014 School Years 43 Colorado Probation Average Percent Positive THC Urinalyses Ages 12 to 17 Years Old 43 Colorado School Resource Officer Survey 44 Predominant Marijuana Violations, 2015 44 Student Marijuana Source, 2015 45 Some Comments from School Resource Officers 45 School Counselor Survey 46 Predominant Marijuana Violations, 2015 47 Student Marijuana Source, 2015 48 Some Comments from School Counselors 48 Youth Use Surveys Not Utilized and Why 52 Youth Risk Behavior Survey (YRBS) 52 Monitoring the Future (MTF) Study 52 Healthy Kids Colorado Survey (HKCS) 53 Related Material 53 Table of Contents 343 of 669 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 3/September 2015 Sources 58 SECTION 3: Adult Marijuana Use 61 Introduction 61 Some Findings 62 Data 63 College Age (18 to 25 Years Old) 63 Average Past Month Use of Marijuana College Age 63 College Age Past Month Marijuana Use (National vs. Colorado) 64 Prevalence of Past 30-Day Marijuana Use 2006-2012 (United States, Denver Metro and Colorado) 64 States for Past Month Marijuana Use College -Age, 2013 65 State of Colorado Probation Number of Positive THC Urinalyses 65 Adults (26+ Years Old) 66 Average Past Month Use of Marijuana 66 Adult Past Month Marijuana Use (National vs. Colorado) 66 Prevalence of Past 30-Day Marijuana Use, 2006-2012, (United States, Denver Metro and Colorado) 67 States for Past Month Marijuana Use Adults, 2013 67 State of Colorado Probation Number of Positive THC Urinalyses 68 Colorado Adult Marijuana Use Demographics 68 Related Material 69 Sources 72 SECTION 4: Emergency Room and Hospital Marijuana -Related Admissions 75 Introduction 75 Some Findings 75 Definitions 77 Data 77 Marijuana -Related Emergency Room Visits 77 Colorado Emergency Department Rates that are Likely Related to Marijuana 78 Colorado Emergency Department Rates that Could be Related to Marijuana 79 Emergency Department Rates Per 100,000 Marijuana -Related, 2011-2013, Colorado and Denver 80 Hospitalizations Related to Marijuana 81 Average Marijuana -Related Hospitalizations 81 Colorado Hospitalization Rates that are Likely Related to Marijuana 82 Colorado Hospitalization Rates that Could be Related to Marijuana 83 Hospital Discharge Rates Per 100,000 Marijuana Related, 2007-2013, Colorado and Denver 84 Table of Contents iii 344 of 669 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 3/September 2015 Marijuana Ingestion Among Children Under 12 Years -of -Age S5 Cost 85 Related Material 85 Sources 87 SECTION 5: Marijuana -Related Exposure 89 Introduction 89 Some Findings 89 Data 91 All Ages, Average Number of Marijuana -Related Exposures 91 Number of Exposures Reported for Marijuana Only 91 Number of Marijuana -Related Exposures, by Age Range 92 Youth Ages 6 to 17 Years Old, Average Number of Marijuana -Related Exposures 92 Children Ages 0 to 5 Years Old, Average Number of Marijuana -Related Exposures 93 Marijuana -Related Exposures Children Ages 0 to 5 Years Old 93 Average Percent of All Marijuana -Related Exposures, Ages 0 to 5 Years Old, National vs. Colorado 94 Related Material 94 Sources 95 SECTION 6: Treatment 97 Introduction 97 Some Findings 97 Data 98 Treatment with Marijuana as Primary Substance of Abuse, All Ages 98 Drug Type for Treatment Admissions, All Ages 99 Percent of Marijuana Treatment Admissions by Age Group 99 Marijuana Treatment Admissions Based on Criminal Justice Referrals 100 Sources 100 SECTION 7: Diversion of Colorado Marijuana 101 Introduction 101 Definitions 102 Some Findings 102 Data 103 Colorado Marijuana Interdiction Seizures 103 Average Pounds of Colorado Marijuana from Interdiction Seizures 104 States to Which Colorado Marijuana Was Destined (2014) 105 Top Three Cities for Marijuana Origin 105 A Few Examples of Interdictions 105 Table of Contents iv 345 of 669 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 3/September 2015 A Few Examples of Investigations 111 A Few Examples of Diversion Involving Youth 116 Some Examples from School Resource Officers 117 Some Examples from School Counselors 118 Comments 118 Sources 119 SECTION 8: Diversion by Parcel 123 Introduction 123 Some Findings 123 Data 124 Parcels Containing Marijuana Mailed from Colorado to Another State 124 Pounds of Colorado Marijuana Seized by the U.S. Postal Inspection Service 125 Number of States Destined to Receive Marijuana Mailed from Colorado 125 A Few Parcel Examples 127 Sources 130 SECTION 9: THC Extraction Labs 133 Introduction 133 Some Findings 134 Data 134 THC Extraction Lab Explosions 134 THC Extraction Lab Explosion Injuries 135 University of Colorado Hospital THC Extraction Lab Self -Admitted Burn Victims 135 Sources 136 SECTION 10: Related Data 137 Topics 137 Crime 137 Colorado Crime 138 All Reported Crime in Denver 138 City and County of Denver Crime 139 Total Marijuana -Related Crime for Denver City and County 139 Marijuana -Related Crime for Denver City and County (Industry and Non -Industry) 140 Denver Police Department Unlawful Public Display/Consumption of Marijuana 141 Boulder Police Department Marijuana Public Consumption Citations 141 Revenue 142 Total Revenue from Marijuana Taxes, Calendar Year 2014 142 Colorado's Total General Fund Revenue, FY 2015 143 Table of Contents 346 of 669 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 3/September 2015 Some Costs Related to Marijuana Revenue for the State of Colorado, FY 2015/16 144 Articles 144 Homeless 146 Total Overnight Beds Provided, January Through June 146 Related Material 146 Suicide Data 148 Average Toxicology of Suicides Among Adolescents Ages 10 to 19 Years Old, 2009-2013 149 Average Toxicology Results by Age Group Colorado, 2009-2013 149 Environmental Impact 149 THC Potency 151 Potency Monitoring Program — Average THC Percent DEA-Submitted Cannabis Samples 1995-2013 (National) 151 Potency Monitoring Program — Average THC Percent All Submitted Hash Oil Samples 1995-2013 (National) 152 Marijuana Use and Alcohol Consumption 153 Colorado Average Consumption of Alcohol in Gallons, Per Calendar Year 153 Medical Marijuana Registry 153 Medical Marijuana Registry Identification Cards 153 Profile of Colorado Medical Marijuana Cardholders 154 Percent of Medical Marijuana Patients Based on Reporting Condition 154 Colorado Licensed Marijuana Businesses as of January 2015 154 Business Comparisons, January 2015 155 Colorado Business Comparisons, January 2015 155 Denver Business Comparisons, January 2015 156 Demand and Market Size 156 2014 Reported Sales of Marijuana in Colorado 157 2014 Price of Marijuana 157 Local Response to the Medical and Recreational Marijuana Industry in Colorado 158 Polling 158 Lawsuits 159 Other Issues 160 Sources 161 SECTION 11: Reference Material 165 Reports 165 Articles 167 Table of Contents vi 347 of 669 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 3/September 2015 Executive Summary Purpose Rocky Mountain High Intensity Drug Trafficking Area (RMHIDTA) is tracking the impact of marijuana legalization in the state of Colorado. This report will utilize, whenever possible, a comparison of three different eras in Colorado's legalization history: • 2006 - 2008: • 2009 - Present: • 2013 - Present: Early medical marijuana era Medical marijuana commercialization and expansion era Recreational marijuana era Rocky Mountain HIDTA will collect and report comparative data in a variety of areas, including but not limited to: • Impaired driving • Youth marijuana use • Adult marijuana use • Emergency room admissions • Marijuana -related exposure cases • Diversion of Colorado marijuana This is the third annual report on the impact of legalized marijuana in Colorado. It is divided into eleven sections, each providing information on the impact of marijuana legalization. The sections are as follows: Section 1- Impaired Driving: • In 2014, when retail marijuana businesses began operating, there was a 32 percent increase in marijuana -related traffic deaths in just one year from 2013. • Colorado marijuana -related traffic deaths increased 92 percent from 2010 - 2014. During the same time period all traffic deaths only increased 8 percent. Executive Summary Page 1 1 348 of 669 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 3/September 2015 • Marijuana -related traffic deaths were approximately 20 percent of all traffic deaths in 2014 compared to half that (10 percent) just five years ago. • In 2014, when retail marijuana businesses began operating, toxicology reports with positive marijuana results of active THC results for primarily driving under the influence have increased 45 percent in just one year. Section 2 - Youth Marijuana Use: • In 2013,11.16 percent of Colorado youth ages 12 to 17 years old were considered current marijuana users compared to 7.15 percent nationally. Colorado ranked 3rd in the nation and was 56 percent higher than the national average. • Drug -related suspensions/expulsions increased 40 percent from school years 2008/2009 to 2013/2014. The vast majority were for marijuana violations. • Positive THC urinalyses tests, for probationers ages 12 to 17 years old, increased 20 percent since marijuana was legalized in 2013. • A 2015 survey of school resource officers and school counselors revealed similar results about increased school marijuana issues since the legalization of recreational marijuana. Section 3 - Adult Marijuana Use: • In 2013, 29 percent of college age students (ages 18 to 25 years old) were considered current marijuana users compared to 18.91 percent nationally. Colorado, ranked 2nd in the nation, was 54 percent higher than the national average. • In 2013,10.13 percent of adults ages 26 years old and over were considered current marijuana users compared to 5.45 percent nationally. Colorado, ranked 5th in the nation, was 86 percent higher than the national average. • Positive THC urinalyses tests, for probationers age 18 to 25 and 26+ years old, increased 49 and 87 percent respectively since marijuana was legalized in 2013. Executive Summary Page 12 349 of 669 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 3/September 2015 Section 4 - Emergency Room Marijuana and Hospital Marijuana -Related Admissions: • In 2014, when retail marijuana businesses began operating, there was a 29 percent increase in the number of marijuana -related emergency room visits in only one year. • In 2014, when retail marijuana businesses began operating, there was a 38 percent increase in the number of marijuana -related hospitalizations in only one year. • In the three years after medical marijuana was commercialized, compared to the three years prior, there was a 46 percent increase in hospitalizations related to marijuana. • Children's Hospital Colorado reported 2 marijuana ingestions among children under 12 in 2009 compared to 16 in 2014. Section 5 - Marijuana -Related Exposure: • In 2014, when retail marijuana businesses began operating, marijuana -only related exposures increased 72 percent in only one year. • In the years medical marijuana was commercialized (2009 - 2012), marijuana - related exposures averaged a 42 percent increase from pre -commercialization years (2006 - 2008) average. • During the years 2013 - 2014, the average number of all age exposures was 175 per year. Exposures have doubled since marijuana was legalized in Colorado. • Young children (ages 0 to 5) marijuana -related exposures in Colorado: o During the years 2013 - 2014, the average number of children exposed was 31 per year. ■ This is a 138 percent increase from the medical marijuana commercialization years (2009 - 2012) average which was a 225 percent increase from pre -commercialization years (2006 - 2008). Executive Summary Page 13 350 of 669 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 3/September 2015 Section 6 - Treatment: • Over the last ten years, the top three drugs involved in treatment admissions, in descending order, were alcohol (average 12,943), marijuana (average 6,491) and methamphetamine (average 5,044). • Marijuana treatment data from Colorado in years 2005 - 2014 does not appear to demonstrate a definite trend. Colorado averages approximately 6,500 treatment admissions annual for marijuana abuse. Section 7 - Diversion of Colorado Marijuana: • During 2009 - 2012, when medical marijuana was commercialized, the yearly average number interdiction seizures of Colorado marijuana increased 365 percent from 52 to 242 per year. • During 2013 - 2014, when recreational marijuana was legalized, the yearly average interdiction seizures of Colorado marijuana increased another 34 percent from 242 to 324. • The average pounds of Colorado marijuana seized, destined for 36 other states, increased 33 percent from 2005 - 2008 compared to 2009 - 2014. Section 8 - Diversion by Parcel: • U.S. mail parcel interceptions of Colorado marijuana, destined for 38 other states, increased 2,033 percent from 2010 - 2014. • Pounds of Colorado marijuana seized in the U.S. mail, destined for 38 other states, increased 722 percent from 2010 - 2014. • From 2006 - 2008, compared to 2013 - 2014, the average number of seized parcels containing Colorado marijuana, that were destined outside the United States, increased over 7,750 percent and pounds of marijuana seized in those parcels increased over 1,079 percent. Executive Summary Page 14 351 of 669 f GO The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 3/September 2015 Section 9 - THC Extraction Labs: • In 2013, there were 12 THC extraction lab explosions compared to 32 in 2014. • In 2013, there were 18 injuries from THC extraction lab explosions compared to 30in2014. Section 10 - Related Data: • Overall, crime in Denver increased 12.3 percent from 2012 to 2014. • Colorado annual tax revenue from the sale of recreational marijuana was 52.5 million (CY2014) or about 0.7 percent of total general fund revenue (FY2015). • The majority of cities and counties in Colorado have banned recreational marijuana businesses. • National THC potency has risen from an average of 3.96 percent in 1995 to an average of 12.55 percent in 2013. The average potency in Colorado was 17.1 percent. • Homelessness increased with the appeal of legal marijuana being a factor. • Denver has more licensed medical marijuana centers (198) than pharmacies (117). Section 11- Related Material: • This section lists various studies and reports. There is much more data in each of the eleven sections, which can be used as a standalone document. All of the sections are on the Rocky Mountain HIDTA website and can be printed individually; go to www.rmhidta.org/Reports. Executive Summary Page 1 5 352 of 669 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 3/September 2015 THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK Page 1 6 353 of 669 1 L 1 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 3/September 2015 Introduction Purpose The purpose of this report and future reports is to document the impact of the legalization of marijuana for medical and recreational use in Colorado. Colorado and Washington serve as experimental labs for the nation to determine the impact of legalizing marijuana. This is an important opportunity to gather and examine meaningful data and facts. Citizens and policymakers may want to delay any decisions on this important issue until there is sufficient and accurate data to make an informed decision. The Debate There is an ongoing debate in this country concerning the impact of legalizing marijuana. Those in favor argue that the benefits of removing prohibition far outweigh the potential negative consequences. Some of the benefits they cite include: • Eliminate arrests for possession and sale, resulting in fewer people with criminal records and a reduction in the prison population. • Free up law enforcement resources to target more serious and violent criminals. • Reduce traffic fatalities since users will switch from alcohol to marijuana, which does not impair driving to the same degree. • No increase in use, even among youth, because of tight regulations. • Added revenue generated through taxation. • Eliminate the black market. Those opposed to legalizing marijuana argue that the potential benefits of lifting prohibition pale in comparison to the adverse consequences. Some of the consequences they cite include: • Increase in marijuana use an -tong youth and young adults. • Increase in marijuana -impaired driving fatalities. • Rise in number of marijuana -addicted users in treatment. Introduction Page 17 354 of 669 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 3/September 2015 • Diversion of marijuana. • Adverse impact and cost of the physical and mental health damage caused by marijuana use. • The economic cost to society will far outweigh any potential revenue generated. Background The next several years should help determine which side is most accurate. A number of states have enacted varying degrees of legalized marijuana by permitting medical marijuana and four permitting recreational marijuana. In 2010, Colorado's Legislature passed legislation that included the licensing of medical marijuana centers ("dispensaries"), cultivation operations and manufacturing of marijuana edibles for medical purposes. In November 2012, Colorado voters legalized recreational marijuana allowing individuals to use and possess an ounce of marijuana and grow up to six plants. The amendment also permits licensing marijuana retail stores, cultivation operations, marijuana edible factories and testing facilities. Washington voters passed a similar measure in 2012. Preface Volume 3 2015 will be formatted similar to Volume 2. It is important to note that, for purposes of the debate on legalizing marijuana in Colorado, there are three distinct timeframes to consider. Those are: the early medical marijuana era (2000 - 2008), the medical marijuana commercialization era (2009 - current) and the recreational marijuana era (2013 - current). • 2000-2008: In November 2000, Colorado voters passed Amendment 20 which permitted a qualifying patient, and/or caregiver of a patient, to possess up to 2 ounces of marijuana and grow 6 marijuana plants for medical purposes. During that time there were between 1,000 and 4,800 medical marijuana cardholders and no known dispensaries operating in the state. • 2009-Current: Beginning in 2009 due to a number of events, marijuana became de facto legalized through the commercialization of the medical marijuana industry. By the end of 2012, there were over 100,000 medical marijuana cardholders and 500 licensed dispensaries operating in Colorado. There were also licensed cultivation operations and edible manufacturers. Introduction Page 18 355 of 669 I C J The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 3/September 2015 • 2013 - Current: In November 2012, Colorado voters passed Constitutional Amendment 64 which legalized marijuana for recreational purposes for anyone over the age of 21. The amendment also allowed for licensed marijuana retail stores, cultivation operations and edible manufacturers. Retail marijuana businesses became operational January 1, 2014. Colorado's History with Marijuana Legalization Early Medical Marijuana 2000 - 2008 In November 2000, Colorado voters passed Amendment 20 which permitted a qualifying patient and/or caregiver of a patient to possess up to 2 ounces of marijuana and grow 6 marijuana plants for medical purposes. Amendment 20 provided identification cards for individuals with a doctor's recommendation to use marijuana for a debilitating medical condition. The system was managed by the Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment (CDPHE), which issued identification cards to patients based on a doctor's recommendation. The department began accepting applications from patients in June 2001. From 2001- 2008, there were only 5,993 patient applications received and only 55 percent of those designated a primary caregiver. During that time, the average was three patients per caregiver and there were no known retail stores selling medical marijuana ("dispensaries"). Dispensaries were not an issue because CDPHE regulations limited a caregiver to no more than five patients. Medical Marijuana Commercialization and Expansion 2009 - Present In 2009, the dynamics surrounding medical marijuana in Colorado changed substantially. There were a number of factors that played a role in the explosion of the medical marijuana industry and number of patients: The first was a Denver District Judge who, in late 2007, ruled that CDPHE violated the state's open meeting requirement when setting a five -patient -to -one -caregiver ratio and overturned the rule. That opened the door for caregivers to claim an unlimited number of patients for whom they were providing and growing marijuana. Although this decision expanded the parameters, very few initially began operating medical Introduction Page 19 356 of 669 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 3/September 2015 marijuana commercial operations (dispensaries) in fear of prosecution, particularly from the federal government. The judge's ruling, and caregivers expanding their patient base, created significant problems for local prosecutors seeking a conviction for marijuana distribution by caregivers. Many jurisdictions ceased or limited filing those types of cases. At a press conference in Santa Ana, California on February 25, 2009, the U.S. Attorney General was asked whether raids in California on medical marijuana dispensaries would continue. He responded "No" and referenced the President's campaign promise related to medical marijuana. In mid -March 2009, the U.S. Attorney General clarified the position saying that the Department of Justice enforcement policy would be restricted to traffickers who falsely masqueraded as medical dispensaries and used medical marijuana laws as a shield. Beginning in the spring of 2009, Colorado experienced an explosion to over 20,000 new medical marijuana patient applications and the emergence of over 250 medical marijuana dispensaries (allowed to operate as "caregivers"). One dispensary owner claimed to be a primary caregiver to 1,200 patients. Government took little or no action against these commercial operations. In July 2009, the Colorado Board of Health, after hearings, failed to reinstate the five - patients -to -one -caregiver rule. On October 19, 2009, U.S. Deputy Attorney General David Ogden provided guidelines for U.S. Attorneys in states that enacted medical marijuana laws. The memo advised "Not focus federal resources in your state on individuals whose actions are in clear and unambiguous compliance with existing state law providing for the medical use of marijuana." By the end of 2009, new patient applications jumped from around 6,000 for the first seven years to an additional 38,000 in just one year. Actual cardholders went from 4,800 in 2008 to 41,000 in 2009. By mid-2010, there were over 900 unlicensed marijuana dispensaries identified by law enforcement. In 2010, law enforcement sought legislation to ban dispensaries and reinstate the one -to -five ratio of caregiver to patient as the model. However, in 2010 the Colorado Legislature passed HB-1284 which legalized medical marijuana centers (dispensaries), marijuana cultivation operations, and manufacturers for marijuana edible products. By Introduction Page 110 357 of 669 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 3/September 2015 2012, there were 532 licensed dispensaries in Colorado and over 108,000 registered patients, 94 percent of who qualified for a card because of severe pain. Recreational Marijuana 2013 - Present In November of 2012, Colorado voters passed Amendment 64, which legalized marijuana for recreational use. Amendment 64 allows individuals 21 years or older to grow up to six plants, possess/use 1 ounce or less and furnish an ounce or less of marijuana if not for remuneration. Amendment 64 permits marijuana retail stores, marijuana cultivation sites, marijuana edible factories and marijuana testing sites. The first retail marijuana businesses were licensed and operational in January of 2014. Some individuals have established private cannabis clubs, formed co-ops for large marijuana grow operations, and/or supplied marijuana for no fee other than donations. What has been the impact of commercialized medical marijuana and legalized recreational marijuana on Colorado? Review the report and you decide. NOTE: • DATA, IF AVAILABLE, WILL COMPARE PRE- AND POST-2009 WHEN MEDICAL MARIJUANA BECAME COMMERCIALIZED AND AFTER 2013 WHEN RECREATIONAL MARIJUANA BECAME LEGALIZED. o MULTI -YEAR COMPARISONS ARE GENERALLY BETTER INDICATORS OF TRENDS. ONE-YEAR FLUCTUATIONS DO NOT NECESSARILY REFLECT A NEW TREND. O PERCENTAGE COMPARISONS MAY BE ROUNDED ro THE NEAREST WHOLE NUMBER • PERCENT CHANGES ADDED TO GRAPHS WERE CALCULATED AND ADDED BY ROCKY MOUNTAIN HIDT`A. • THIS REPORT WILL CITE DATASETS WITH TERMS SUCH AS "MARIJUANA -RELATED" OR "TESTED POSITIVE FOR MARIJUANA." THAT DOES NOT NECESSARILY PROVE. THAT MARIJUANA WAS THE CAUSE OF THE INCIDENT. Introduction Page 111 358 of 669 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 3/September 2015 THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK Page 112 359 of 669 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vo1.3/September 2015 SECTION 1: Impaired Driving Introduction This section provides information on traffic deaths and impaired driving involving positive tests for marijuana. The data comparison, when available, will be from 2006 through 2014. The information compares the early medical marijuana era (2006 - 2008), the medical marijuana commercialization and expansion era (2009 - current) and the recreational marijuana era (2013 - current) in Colorado. • 2006 - 2008: There were between 1,000 and 4,800 medical marijuana cardholders and no known dispensaries operating in Colorado. • 2009 - Current: There were over 108,000 medical marijuana cardholders and 532 licensed dispensaries operating in Colorado by the end of 2012. See the introduction at the beginning of this report for more details on the commercialization and explosion of Colorado's medical marijuana trade. • 2013 to- Current: In November 2012, Colorado voters passed Constitutional Amendment 64 which legalized marijuana for recreational purposes for anyone over 21 years of age. The amendment also allowed for licensed marijuana retail stores, cultivation operations and edibles manufacturing. Definitions DUID: Driving Under the Influence of Drugs (DUID) which can include alcohol in combination with drugs. This is an important measurement since the driver's ability to operate a vehicle was sufficiently impaired that it brought his or her driving to the attention of law enforcement. Not only the erratic driving but the subsequent evidence that the subject was under the influence of marijuana confirms the causation factor. SECTION 1: Impaired Driving Page 113 360 of 669 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 3/September 2015 Definitions in Reviewing Fatality Data: • Marijuana -Related: Also called "marijuana mentions," is any time marijuana shows up in the toxicology report. It could be marijuana only or marijuana with other drugs and/or alcohol. • Marijuana Only: When toxicology results show marijuana and no other drugs or alcohol. • Fatalities: A death resulting from a traffic crash involving a motor vehicle. • Operators: Anyone in control of their own movements such as a driver, pedestrian or bicyclist. Some Findings • In 2014, when retail marijuana stores began operating, there was a 32 percent increase in marijuana -related traffic deaths in just one year. • Colorado marijuana -related traffic deaths increased 92 percent from 2010 — 2014. During the same time periods all traffic deaths only increased 8 percent respectively. • In 2009, Colorado marijuana -related traffic deaths involving operators testing positive for marijuana represented 10 percent of all traffic fatalities. By 2014, that number nearly doubled to 19.26 percent. • The average number of marijuana -related traffic deaths increased 41 percent in the two years recreational marijuana was legalized (2013 — 2014) compared to the medical marijuana commercialization years (2009 — 2012), which was 48 percent higher than pre -commercialization years (2006 — 2008). • Consistent with the past, in 2014 still only 47 percent of operators involved in traffic deaths were tested for drug impairment. Out of those who were tested, about 1 in 4 tested positive for marijuana. • The Colorado State Patrol DUID Program, started in 2014, indicated: o 77 percent (674) of the 874 DUIDs involved marijuana SECTION 1: Impaired Driving Page 114 361 of 669 1 JJ The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 3/September 2015 o 41 percent (354) of the 874 DUIDs involved marijuana only • Denver Police Department DUIDs involving marijuana increased 100 percent from 2013 (33) to 2014 (66). • In 2014, when retail marijuana businesses began operating, toxicology reports with positive marijuana results of active THC primarily related to driving under the influence increased 45 percent in only one year. Data for Traffic Deaths NOTE: • THE DATA FOR 2012 THROUGH 2014 WAS OBTAINED FROM THE NATIONAL HIGHWAY TRAFFIC SAFETY ADMINISTRATION'S FATALITY ANALYSIS REPORTING SYSTEM (FARS). COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS OF DATA WAS CONDUCTED BY ROCKY MOUNTAIN HIDTA AFTER CONTACTING ALL CORONER OFFICES AND LAW ENFORCEMENT AGENCIES INVOLVED WITH FATALITIES TO OBTAIN TOXICOLOGY REPORTS. THIS REPRESENTS 100 PERCENT REPORTING. PRIOR YEAR(S) MAY HAVE HAD LESS THAN 100 PERCENT REPORTING TO THE COLORADO DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION, AND SUBSEQUENTLY THE FATALITY ANALYSIS REPORTING SYSTEM (FARS). • 2014 FARS DATA WILL NOT BE OFFICIAL UNTIL JANUARY 2016. SECTION 1: Impaired Driving Page 115 362 of 669 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 3/September 2015 Number of Deaths Total Number of Statewide Traffic Deaths 800-- 700 600 —535 554 548 500 1- 400 300 -1- 200 -1 100 4- 0 , 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 SOURCE: National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, Fatality Analysis Reporting System (FARS), 2006- 2013 and CDOT/RMHIDTA 2014 Crash Year 2006 Marijuana -Related Traffic Deaths* Total Statewide Fatalities 535 Fatalities with Operators Testing Positive for Marijuana 37 Percentage Total Fatalities (Marijuana) 2007 554 39 6.92% 2008 548 43 2009 465 47 2010 450 49 2011 447 63 2012 472 78 7.04% 7.85% 10.10% 10.89% 14.09% 2013 481 71 2014 488 94 16.53% 14.76% 19.26% *Fatalities Involving Operators Testing Positive for Marijuana SOURCE: National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, Fatality Analysis Reporting System (FARS), 2006- 2013 and CDOT/RMHIDTA 2014 SECTION 1: Impaired Driving Page 1 16 363 of 669 / The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 3/September 2015 Average Number 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 Average Number of Traffic Deaths Related to Marijuana * 2006-2008 83 48% Increase)(41% lncreas 2009-2012 Pre -Commercialization Post -Commercialization 2013-2014 LegaN7ation *Average Number of Fatalities when an Operator Tested Positive for Marijuana SOURCE: National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, Fatality Analysis Reporting System (FARS), 2006- 2013 and CDOT/RMHIDTA 2014 Numberof Deaths 50 - 40 30 20 10 -f -- 0�-- 37 Traffic Deaths Related to Marijuana* Commercialization --1 94 Legalization 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 *Number of Fatalities Involving Operators Testing Positive for Marijuana SOURCE: National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, Fatality Analysis Reporting System (FARS), 2006- 2013 and CDOT/RMHIDTA 2014 SECTION 1: Impaired Driving Page 117 364 of 669 1 V V The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Percent of Deaths Percent of All Traffic Deaths That Were Marijuana Related* 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 *Percent of All Fatalities Where the Operators Tested Positive for Marijuana SOURCE: Vol. 3/September 2015 19.26% Legalization 2013 2014 National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, Fatality Analysis Reporting System (FARS), 2006- 2013 and CDOT/RMHIDTA 2014 Crash Year 2006 Operators Testing Positive for Marijuana* Total Operators Involved in Crashes 795 Operators in Fatal Crashes Testing Positive for Marijuana 32 Percentage of Total Operators Who Tested Positive for Marijuana 2007 866 34 4.03% 2008 782 39 2009 718 46 2010 652 45 2011 648 57 2012 732 70 2013 702 63 3.93% 4.99% 6.41% 6.90% 8.81% 9.56% 2014 765 87 *Operators Involved in Fatalities Testing Positive for Marijuana SOURCE: National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, Fatality Analysis Reporting System (FARS), 2006- 2013 and RMHIDTA 2014 8.97% 11.37% ❖ Consistent with the past, in 2014 still only 47 percent of operators involved in traffic deaths were tested for drug impairment. SECTION 1: Impaired Driving Page 118 365 of 669 I V The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 3/September 2015 Average Number of Operators Testing Positive for Marijuana 2013-2014 Pre-Commerdali7ation Post-Corninerdalization Legalization SOURCE: National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, Fatality Analysis Reporting System (FARS), 2006- 2013 and CDOT/RMHIDTA 2014 30.00% 2006-2008 2009-2012 Percent of Operators Tested Who Were Positive for Marijuana* 7--- 25.00% 24.03% 20.00%.18_21% 19.28% 15.00% 13.45% 13.72% 16.72% I 9.73% ° 10.00% -7. ° 8.40% Tegialfion e. Commercialization 5.00% 0.00% , i :-- -r r 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 *Percent of All Operators Tested for Drug Impairment SOURCE: National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, Fatality Analysis Reporting System (FARS), 2006- 2013 and CDOT/RMHIDTA 2014 SECTION 1: Impaired Driving Page I 19 366 of 669 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 3/September 2015 Drug Combinations for Operators Positive for Marijuana* Marijuana and Other Drugs (No Alcohol) 15°l0 Marijuanaarid Alcohol 37% Marijuana, Other Drugs and Alcohol 15% ManjuanaONl Y 33% *Toxicology results for all substances present in individuals who tested positive for marijuana SOURCE: National Highway Traffic Safety Administration/Colorado Department of Transportation/Rocky Mountain HIDTA 4* In 2014, of the operators who tested positive for marijuana, one out of three had only marijuana present in their system. Data for Impaired Driving NOTE: THE NUMBER OF DUID ARRESTS IS NOT REFLECTIVE OF THE TOTAL NUMBER OF PEOPLE ARRESTED FOR DRIVING UNDER THE INFLUENCE WHO ARE INTOXICATED ON NON -ALCOHOL SUBSTANCES. IF SOMEONE IS DRIVING BOTH INTOXICATED ON ALCOHOL AND INTOXICATED ON ANY OTHER DRUG (INCLUDING MARIJUANA), ALCOHOL IS ALMOST ALWAYS THE ONLY INTOXICANT TESTED FOR. A DRIVER WHO TESTS OVER THE LEGAL LIMIT FOR ALCOHOL WILL BE CHARGED WITH DUI, EVEN IF HE OR SHE IS POSITIVE FOR OTHER DRUGS. HOWEVER, WHETHER OR NOT HE OR SHE IS POSITIVE FOR OTHER DRUGS WILL REMAIN UNKNOWN BECAUSE OTHER DRUGS ARE NOT OFTEN TESTED FOR. SECTION 1: Impaired Driving Page 120 367 of 669 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 3/September 2015 4500 4000 ):W Trends in Cannabinoid Screens & THC Confirmations in Colorado 2009 - 2014 Cannabinoid screens • Positive Screens (% positive of total) la Positive THC 2 ng/ra or higher. '2014 THC 1 ng/mL or higher. (96 of pos. screens with THC confirmed) 2809 2009 2010 3987 2011 4263 2012 4333 2013 6396 4371 Data horn ChemaToa laboratory was mert d with dotJ supplied by Colorado Drpartment of P.blit Health and EnviroMenl i Toakoi00y labswatory for 2009 •2013 'Dw to a chants in data cognition the confirmation cvton for Powers THC dimmed from 2 nj/rnl )2005.2011) to 104/m112014). Dated on eealible data II is e nimated -111% of caret would tag between !and 2 n1/mt molting In an estimated 67f4 Positive THC nor above 2 fq/ml in 2014. SOURCE: Sarah Urfer, M.S., D-ABFT-FT; ChemaTox Laboratory Explanation of ChemaTax Graphs 2014 The below three graphs are Rocky Mountain HIDTA's conversation of ChemaTox data into raw numbers. The first graph represents the total number of drug screens that were tested for cannabinoids. Of those screens tested, the second graph represents the number of Cannabinoid positive screens. The third graph demonstrates, of those positive screens, how many were positive for active THC. SECTION 1: Impaired Driving Page 121 368 of 669 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact NumberofScreens 5,000 4,500 4,000 3,500 3,000 2,500 2,000 1,500 1,000 500 0 Number of Cannabinoid Screens 2009 2010 SOURCE: Rocky Mountain HIDTA Number of Positive Screens 2011 2012 2013 Vol. 3/September 2015 2014 Number of Positive Cannabinoid Screens 2009 SOURCE: Rocky Mountain HIDTA 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 SECTION 1: Impaired Driving Page 1 22 369 of 669 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 3/September 2015 Number of Screenswith ActiveTHC 2,500 2,000 1,500 1,000 500 Number of Positive Cannabinoid Screens with Active THC 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 ■ 1ng/rL ■ 2ng/mL *Due to a changein data collection, the confirmation cutoff for Positive THC changed from 2ng/mL (2009-2013) to 1 ng/mL (2014). Based on available data it is estimated-18% of cases would fall between 1 and 2ng/mL resulting in an estimated 67% Positive THC at or above 2 ng/mL in 2014."1 SOURCE: Rocky Mountain HIDTA NOTE: THE ABOVE GRAPHS INCLUDE DATA FROM CHEMATOX LABORATORY WHICH WAS MERGED WITH DATA SUPPLIED BY COLORADO DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC HEALTH AND ENVIRONMENT - TOXICOLOGY LABORATORY. THE VAST MAJORITY OF THE SCREENS ARE DUID SUBMISSIONS FROM COLORADO LAW ENFORCEMENT. NOTE: COLORADO DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC HEALTH AND ENVIRONMENT DISCONTINUED TESTING IN DULY 2013. SECTION 1: Impaired Driving Page 123 370 of 669 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 3/September 2015 A 0 .a E z 900 800 700 600 500 400 300 200 100 0 Colorado State Patrol Number of DUIDs, 2014 DUIDs Marijuana Only DUIDs Involving Total Number of Marijuana DUIDs SOURCE: Colorado State Patrol, CSP Citations for Drug Impairment by Drug Type, 2014 ❖ 77 percent of total DUIDs involved marijuana ❖ 41 percent of total DUIDs involved marijuana only NOTE: "MARIJUANA CITATIONS DEFINED AS ANY CITATION WHERE CONTACT WAS CTTED FOR DRIVING UNDER THE INFLUENCE (DUI) OR DRIVING WHILE ABILITY IMPAIRED (DWAI) AND MARIJUANA INFORMATION WAS FILLED OUT ON TRAFFIC STOP FORM INDICATING MARIJUANA & ALCOHOL, MARIJUANA & OTHER CONTROLLED SUBSTANCES, OR MARIJUANA ONLY PRESENT BASED ON OFFICER OPINION ONLY (NO TOXICOLOGICAL CONFIRMATION)." - COLORADO STATE PATROL SECTION 1: Impaired Driving Page 1 24 371 of 669 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 3/September 2015 Number of DUIDs 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 Denver Police Department Number of DUIDs Involving Marijuana 2013 2014 SOURCE: Denver Police Department, Traffic Investigations Bureau via Data Analysis Unit Aurora Police Department Number of DUIDs, 2014 H p 150 11: DUIDs Involving Marijuana SOURCE: Aurora Police Department, Traffic Division Total DUIDs ❖ 66 percent of total DUIDs involved marijuana. SECTION 1: Impaired Driving Page 125 372 of 669 I TV The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 3/September 2015 PercentPositive 60.00% 59.00% 58.00% 57.00% 56.00% 55.00% 54.00% 53.00% 52.00% 51.00% Larimer County Sheriff's Office Percent of DUIDs Involving Marijuana* 2013 *Percent of all DUID blood samples submitted for drug testing SOURCE: Larimer County Sheriff's Office, Records Unit 500 s 400 300 o 200 L d 8 100 z 2014 Number of DUI Admissions to Arapahoe House with Marijuana as a Self -Reported Drug of Choice 2013 SOURCE: Arapahoe House, Public Communications Office 2014 SECTION 1: Impaired Driving Page 126 373 of 669 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Number of Accidents 100,000 80,000 60,000 40,000 20,000 0 Vol. 3/September 2015 Total Number of Accidents in Colorado Commercialization 115,455 Le alization 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 SOURCE: Colorado Department of Transportation (CDOT) ❖ 15 percent increase from 2012 to 2014 Related Costs Economic Cost of Vehicle Accidents Resulting in Fatalities: According to the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration report, The Economic and Societal Impact Of Motor Vehicles Crashes, 2010, the total economic costs for a vehicle fatality is $1,398,916. That includes property damage, medical, insurance, productivity, among other considerations.2 Cost of Driving Under the Influence: The cost associated with the first driving - under -the -influence offense (DUI) is estimated at $10,270. Costs associated with a DUID (driving -under -the -influence -of -drugs) are very similar to those of a DUI/alcohol' SECTION 1: Impaired Driving Page 127 374 of 669 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 3/September 2015 Drug Recognition Experts According to the Colorado Department of Transportation Drug Recognition Experts (DRE) Coordinator, in 2014, 290 individuals evaluated (48.49 percent) showed signs of marijuana impairment.4 Case Examples and Related Material Both Drivers Killed Were "Stoned": Two females, one 28 and the other 49, died in an automobile crash on September 29, 2014 in Longmont, Colorado. "Both drivers had more than 5 ng/mL of THC in their systems..." The younger woman, who was believed to be the primary cause of the accident, was also under the influence of alcohol. This woman was the mother of twin 3-year-olds who were in the vehicle but survived.5 Hit and Run Kills Veteran: In April 2014, the driver of a vehicle ran into the back of a motorcycle sending the cyclist flying into the street. The driver of the vehicle, who had blood alcohol content (BAC) of 2.5 and marijuana in his system, failed to stop and went home. The driver of the motorcycle was a 23-year-old airman stationed at Buckley Air Force Base involved in the Global Missile Warning System. The driver of the vehicle, a 32-year-old and former president of his fraternity at Colorado State University, was sentenced to 12 years in prison.' Teen Driver Under the Influence Kills a High School Student: In November 2014, a teenager driving under the influence of marijuana hit and killed a 16-year-old high school student. One of the passengers in the vehicle said that the driver had been smoking "weed" in the car and was too high to drive safely. Another friend told law enforcement and he and the driver had smoked "weed" before driving to the high school the day of the crash. He said that he tried to convince the driver not to take the wheel but the driver refused. According to police the driver had trouble walking a straight line, following directions and smelled like marijuana.' One Died in Three -Car Accident During Morning Commute: In January 2013, during the morning commute, a Jeep hit the back of a Subaru station wagon as both vehicles were headed eastbound on U.S. 36. The driver of the Jeep lost control and the vehicle flipped, ejecting the driver who died at the scene.' The driver of the Jeep tested positive for marijuana only.* Information obtained by Rocky Mountain HIDTA not published in the original article. SECTION 1: Impaired Driving Page 128 375 of 669 1 Y The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 3/September 2015 Driver and Passenger Engulfed in Flames: On August 3, 2015 at 6:30 in the morning, 25-year-old Ricardo Gardea drove his SUV through a neighborhood careening through traffic. He was spotted by police prior to the crash and estimated to be driving at about 100 mph. He ran a red light and began "pinballing" off cars in the intersection. He eventually slammed into the back of a Jeep which was "hurtled roughly a block." The gas tank exploded, engulfing the driver and his passenger in flames. The police officer at the scene called in "we need the paramedics in here quick because this person is still moving, but he, uh, he's on fire." The driver of the vehicle, whose burns covered 65 percent of his body, died leaving behind a 7-month-old daughter. The passenger of the vehicle was seriously injured. Gardea, who caused this six -vehicle accident, fled the scene on foot but was subsequently arrested. According to the police report, "Gardea told investigators that he was under the influence of marijuana and had been drinking." The 25-year-old has a criminal record dating back to 2007 including more than 20 arrests.9 Hit and Run Kills One: An SUV crashed into a minivan driven by a mother with two children inside. The crash happened at Peoria and 51st Street a little after midnight. Both the driver and the passenger of the SUV left the scene of the accident, taking off running. The driver was later arrested and tested positive for marijuana only.* The mother died from her injuries, the 6-year-old had serious injuries and the 11-year-old minor injuries.'0 Drag Racing Kills Two: In June 2013, while drag racing a driver lost control of his vehicle and struck another vehicle head on. This happened at about 8:30 p.m. at Constitution Avenue just east of Circle Drive in Colorado Springs. The driver, who was allegedly drag racing, was killed as was the driver of the other vehicle who was an 84- year-old woman. The driver was a 25-year-old male who tested positive for marijuana only.11 Pedestrian Killed: In June 2013 a pedestrian was hit and killed when crossing a street at the 1400 block of South Nevada Avenue in Colorado Springs, Colorado. The driver of the vehicle was not charged because the pedestrian was not crossing at a crosswalk.72 The pedestrian tested positive for marijuana only. - Bicyclist Died from a Collision: A bicyclist cycling eastbound on westbound lanes of 100th Avenue in Thornton didn't stop at a stop light at the intersection with Colorado Boulevard. The bicyclist was struck by a GMC pick-up at about 10:30 p.m.13 The bicyclist, who was at fault, tested positive for marijuana and oxycodone, died.. SECTION 1: Impaired Driving Page 129 376 of 669 I J V The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 3/September 2015 Injured Teacher No Fan of Marijuana: An article in The Pueblo Chieftain dated June 21, 2015 tells the story of a young schoolteacher who was crippled from a head-on collision by a truck driven by a man under the influence of marijuana. Witnesses to the accident saw the driver of the truck stumbling out of a Loaf 'N Jug and enter his truck. The observers were so alarmed they called authorities and then followed him so they could report his location. They then watched him weave across the lines of the highway and smash head-on into the young teacher's vehicle. They searched the vehicle and subsequently discovered small amounts of marijuana inside a marijuana grinder. The Pueblo West High School mathematics teacher said, "People didn't know what they were voting for. And if it continues to grow as it has since being legalized, there will be a lot more drivers who are high, and a lot more victims like me."14 Driver High on Pot Causes Crash that Injures Six: In July 2014, a 22-year-old woman was speeding eastbound on Colfax Avenue at about 2:30 in the morning. She ran a red light at Speer Boulevard and collided with another vehicle. Apparently she was driving 60 mph in a 30 mph zone when the accident, injuring six people, occurred. The young female admitted to "drinking one beer and smoked a bowl of marijuana." "A just -completed study on medical marijuana by University of Colorado researchers found the proportion of marijuana -positive drivers involved in fatal crashes in Colorado increased dramatically since the middle of 2009. That's when medical marijuana was commercialized in the state."15 Pilot Error Caused Fatal 2013 Plane Crash: In December 2013, a pilot and her two passengers were killed when the airplane stalled and went into a spin prior to crashing into a remote snow-covered area on the Western Slope. The National Transportation Safety Board report said that the pilot failed to maintain adequate air speed while flying in low altitude, causing the wreck. A toxicology test showed that the pilot had consumed marijuana prior to the accident but there was not enough evidence to determine impairment.16 Drugged Driving Increases: It was brought to the attention of Rocky Mountain HIDTA that although the article "Drug Use on U.S. Roads Rises as Drunken Driving Drops," was correctly cited and used in this report; the article itself misquotes a study from the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA). Therefore, we have removed that entry from our publication. Buying Auto Insurance to Combat Pothead Drivers: A 2007 study by the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration found that marijuana was the most common drug used by drivers. "This sample found that about 4 percent of drivers were high during day and more than 6 percent at night." SECTION 1: Impaired Driving Page 130 377 of 669 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 3/September 2015 Researchers from Columbia University's Mailman School of Public Health, examining over 23,500 fatal car crashes, found that marijuana contributed to 12 percent of the deaths in 2010 from only 4 percent in 1999. "But increased danger on the road from stoned drivers in states where use is legal means all drivers should consider additional auto insurance, such as uninsured/underinsured motor coverage..." This came from Insurance Information Institute spokesperson Loretta Worters.'7 Study on Marijuana -Impaired Drivers. The National Institute on Drug Abuse and the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration funded a study of 18 persons behind the wheel of a driving simulator who were given different combinations of marijuana, alcohol and/or a placebo. The study revealed that newer marijuana users were worse drivers at just 1 or 2 nanograms than heavy marijuana users. Also of note for the study: • "THC moved more rapidly than alcohol out of the bloodstream and into the body, making it harder to detect accurately with a blood test." Also of note from this study: • "Some heavy users had detectable THC in their body for nearly a month, and they performed some tasks worse up to three weeks after they last consumed marijuana." • "Drivers who drank alcohol and smoked marijuana saw a stronger "high" than with pot alone..." • Combining alcohol and marijuana impairs the driver to a greater degree than just one or the other. Marilyn Huestis, chief of chemistry and drug metabolism of the Intramural Research Program at the National Institute on Drug Abuse, stated, "One of the things we know happens with cannabis is that it reduces your field of vision and you get tunnel vision, so you're unable to react as quickly."18,19 70 Percent of Marijuana Users Have Driven Under the Influence: The National Cannabis Prevention and Information Centre (NCPIC) surveyed 4,600 Australians and found that 70 percent of recent marijuana users had driven under the influence of the drug. The primary researcher, Dr. Gates, stated, "We know from research that any cannabis use will affect your tracking ability, your reaction time, your attention span, your awareness of distance, your co- ordination, concentration." He said, "It is time for a wake-up call."20 SECTION 1: Impaired Driving Page 131 378 of 669 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 3/September 2015 Sources 1 Sarah Urfer, ChemaTox Laboratory. 2 U.S. Department of Transportation National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, "The Economic and Societal Impact Of Motor Vehicle Crashes, 2010," May 2014, <http://www.nrd.nhtsa.dot.gov/pubs/812013.pdf>, accessed February 19, 2015 3 Cost of a DUI brochure, <https://www.codot.gov/library/brochures/COSTDUI09.pdf/view>, accessed February 19, 2015 4 Colorado Department of Transportation, 2015 5 Anica Padilla, ABC7 News -Denver, December 3, 2014, "Police: Both drivers killed in Longmont crash were stoned, one had also been drinking", <http://www.thedenverchannel. com/news/local-news/police-both-drivers-killed-in- longrnont-crash-were-stoned-one-had-also-been-drinking>, accessed December 3, 2014 6 Raquel Villanueva and Blair Shiff, KUSA-9 News, November 14, 2014, "Man get 12 years for hit-and-run that killed airman," <http://www.9news.com/story/news/local/2014/11/14/man-sentenced-in-hit-and-run- that-killed-an-airman/19027447/>, accessed July 23, 2015 Megan Quinn, Broomfield News, March 17, 2015, "Police: Teen driver who struck. Killed Broomfield HS student Chad Britton was high at time of accident, <http://www.broomfieldenterprise.com/broomfield-news/ci_27729745/police-teen- driver-who-struck-killed-broomfield-hs>, accessed March 18, 2015 8 Mitchel Byars, The Denver Post/Lifestyles section, January 22, 2013, "1 dead after 3- car accident closes U.S. 36 for hours during morning commute", <http ://www. denverpo st. com/ci_22423991 /u-s-36-shut-down-after-possibly-fatal>, accessed December 3, 2014 9 Jesse Paul, The Denver Post, "Denver Hit-and-Run/Police ID suspect in deadly wreck," August 5, 2015 SECTION 1: Impaired Driving Page 132 379 of 669 I JJ The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 3/September 2015 70 KUSA 9News/Denver, December 25, 2013, "1 killed, 3 injured in Denver hit-and- run," http://archive.9news.com/news/local/article/370380/346/1-killed-3-injured-in- Denver-hit-and-run, accessed December 4, 2014 " Travis Ruiz, FOX21News.com, June 24, 2013, "Two people killed in possible street - racing crash", <http://fox2lnews.com/2013/06/24/two-people-killed-in-possible-street- racing-crash/>, accessed December 3, 2014 72 Travis Ruiz, Fox2lnews.com, June 24, 2013, "Springs police: Pedestrian killed when crossing street," <http://fox2lnews.com/2013/06/24/springs-police-pedestrian- killed-when-crossing-street/>, accessed December 3, 2014 13 9News Staff, KUSA-Channel 9 Denver, March 10, 2013, "Police: Bicyclist at fault in fatal weekend collision," <http://www.9news.com/story/news/loca1/2014/02/25/1847780/>, accessed December 4, 2014 74 Steven Henson, The Pueblo Chieftain, June 21, 2015, "Injured teacher no fan of marijuana," <http://www.chieftain.com/news/3695332-120/driver-marijuana-pueblo- driving>, accessed June 22, 2015 15 Dave Young, KDVR.com, July 30, 2014, "Driver accused of causing crash that hurt 6 was high on pot, DA says," <http://kdvr.com/2014/07/30/22-year-old-woman-charged- with-driving-high-assaulting-six-people/,>accessed July 23, 2015 16 The Associated Press, May 5, 2015, "Pilot error caused fatal 2013 plane crash," <http: //www.9news.com/story/news/crime/2015/05/05/grand-junction-pilot-error-plane- crash-2013/26916463/>, accessed May 7, 2015 17 Ed Leefeldt, insurance.com, April 29, 2014, "Buying auto insurance to combat pothead drivers," <http://www.insurance.com/auto-insurance/coverage/buying-auto- insurance-combat-pothead-drivers.html>, accessed October 20, 2014 18 Trevor Hughes, USA Today, June 23, 2015, "Study analyzes how much pot impairs drivers," <http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/2015/06/23/marijuana- drivers/29155165/>, accessed June 25, 2015 19 DailyMail.com reporter, June 24, 2015, "Official: Cannabis use impairs driving as much as alcohol says first of its kind study while drug's legality continues to spread," <http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article- SECTION 1: Impaired Driving Page 133 380 of 669 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 3/September 2015 3137943/Marijuana-DOES-impair-driving-kind-comprehensive-government- study-reveals-cannabis-use-affect-motor-skills-three-drinks.html>, accessed June 25, 2015 20 Andrew Griffits, ABCNews.net, June 9, 2015, "Nearly 70 per cent of cannabis users report driving under the influence: research," <http://www. abc.net. au/news/2015-06-10/cannabis-users-report-driving-under- influence/6534368>, accessed June 22, 2015 SECTION 1: Impaired Driving Page 134 381 of 669 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol, 3/September 2015 SECTION 2: Youth Marijuana Use Introduction The following section reviews youth use rates of marijuana in Colorado and nationally. Datasets examine reported use "within the last 30 days" as opposed to "lifetime" usage. The use of the 30-day data provides a more accurate picture and is classified as current use. The lifetime data collection model typically includes individuals who are infrequent or experimental users of marijuana. Most of the comparisons are between 2006 through 2013. The information compares the early medical marijuana era (2006 - 2008), the medical marijuana commercialization and expansion era (2009 - current) and the recreational marijuana era (2013 -current) in Colorado. • 2006 -2008: There were between 1,000 and 4,800 medical marijuana cardholders and no known dispensaries operating in Colorado. • 2009 - Current: There were over 108,000 medical marijuana cardholders and 532 licensed dispensaries operating in Colorado by the end of 2012. See the introduction at the beginning of this report for more details on the commercialization and explosion of Colorado's medical marijuana trade. • 2013 - Current: In November 2012, Colorado voters passed Constitutional Amendment 64 which legalized marijuana for recreational purposes for anyone over 21 years of age. The amendment also allowed for licensed marijuana retail stores, cultivation operations and edibles manufacturing. Some Findings • Youth (ages 12 to 17 years old) Past Month Marijuana Use, 2013 o Colorado average for youth was 11.16 percent SECTION 2: Youth Marijuana Use Page 135 382 of 669 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 3/September 2015 o National average for youth was 7.15 percent • Colorado was ranked 3rd in the nation for current marijuana use among youth (56.08 percent higher than the national average) • In 2006, Colorado ranked 14th in the nation for current marijuana use among youth • Between pre -commercialization and post -commercialization of medical marijuana, there was a 24 percent increase in youth (ages 12 to 17 years old) monthly marijuana use. There was an 8 percent increase in just one year after legalization of recreational marijuana in 2013. • The top ten states for the highest rate of current marijuana use were all medical marijuana states whereas the bottom ten were all non -medical -marijuana states. • There was a 40 percent increase in drug -related suspensions and expulsions in Colorado from school year 2008/2009 to 2013/2014. • There was a 20 percent increase in the percent of 12 to 17 year old probationers testing positive for marijuana since marijuana was legalized for recreational purposes. • A June, 2015 Rocky Mountain HIDTA survey of 95 Colorado school resource officers (SROs) and an August 2015 survey of 188 Colorado school counselors reveals: o The majority have experienced an increase in student marijuana -related incidents since recreational marijuana was legalized. o The most common violations on campus are possession and being under the influence during school hours. o Most students obtain their marijuana from a friend who gets it legally, or from their parents/family member(s). NOTE: SAMHSA RELEASED NATIONAL DATA ON DRUG USE FOR 2014 IN SEPTEMBER 2015. HOWEVER, STATE DRUG USE DATA FOR 2014 WILL NOT BE AVAILABLE UNTIL TOWARD THE END OF 2015. SECTION 2: Youth Marijuana Use Page 136 383 of 669 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 3/September 2015 Data Average Percent 12.00% 10.00% 8.00% 6.00% 4.00% 2.00% 0.00% Colorado Average Past Month Use of Marijuana Ages 12 to 17 Years Old 2013 (Pre -Commercialisation) (Post -Commercialization) (Legalization) SOURCE: SAMHSA.gov, National Survey on Drug Use and Health 2012 and 2013 Average Percentage 2006-2008 2009-2012 Youth (Ages 12 to 17 Years Old) Past Month Marijuana Use National vs. Colorado 12.00 10.00 8.00 6.00 4.00 2.00 0.00 ■ National Average 6.74 In Colorado Average 7.60 6.67 8.15 Commercialization Legalization 6.67 9.13 7.03 10.17 7.38 9.91 7.64 10.72 SOURCE: SAMHSA.gov, National Survey on Drug Use and Health, 2006-2013 7.55 10.47 SECTION 2: Youth Marijuana Use Page 137 384 of 669 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 3/September 2015 Prevalence of Past 30-Day Marijuana Use, 12 to 17 Years Old, 2006-2012 12.00% v 10.00% 8.00% 6.00% 4.00% 2.00% 0.00% United States Colorado ■ 2006-2008 If 2008-2010 r_ 2010-2012 Denver Metro SOURCE: Denver Epidemiology Working Group (DEWG), Denver Office of Drug Strategy, October 29, 2014 and National Survey of Drug Use and Health, Sub -state Estimates 2006 - 2012 Average Percentage 12.0% 10.0% 8.0% 6.0% 4.0% 2.0% 0.0% National Average Past Month Use by 12 to 17 Years Old, 2013 Non -Medical Marijuana States Medical Marijuana Recreational/Medical States Marijuana States SOURCE: SAMHSA.gov, National Survey on Drug Use and Health 2012 and 2013 SECTION 2: Youth Marijuana Use Page 138 385 of 669 1 JJ The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 3/September 2015 State -by -State Past Month Usage by 12 to 17 Years Old, 2013 Rhode Island Vermont Colorado Washington New Hampshire Oregon Hawaii Maine New Mexico Delaware Michigan Massachusetts Alaska Montana Connecticut Nevada Arizona New York California Florida Maryland Ohio Wisconsin Georgia South Carolina Missouri Pennsylvania Minnesota North Carolina Illinois Iowa Nebraska Virginia Tennessee Indiana Wyoming Texas Arkansas Idaho New Jersey Utah West Virgina North Dakota Oklahoma Mississippi South Dakota Louisiana Kansas Kentucky Alabama As of 2013: Legalized Recreational/Medical Marijuana State Legalized MedicalMarijuanaState Non -Legalized Medical Marij uana State 0.00% 2.00% 4.00% 6.00% 8.00% 10.00% 12.00% 14.00% Average Percentage SOURCE: SAMHSA.gov, National Survey on Drug Use and Health 2012 and 2013 SECTION 2: Youth Marijuana Use Page 139 386 of 669 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 3/September 2015 States for Past Month Marijuana Use Youth (12 to 17 Years Old), 20131 ToD 10 Bottom 10 (Medical Marijuana States in 2013) (Non -Medical Marijuana States in 2013) National Rate = 7.15% 1. Rhode Island -12.95% 2. Vermont - 11.34% 3. ++Colorado - 11.16% 4. ++Washington - 9.81% 5. New Hampshire - 9.62% 6. Oregon - 9.59% 7. Hawaii - 9.55% 8. Maine - 9.26% 9. New Mexico - 9.22% 10. Delaware - 9.15% 41. Utah - 5.35% 42. West Virginia - 5.23% 43. North Dakota - 5.19% 44. Oklahoma - 5.16% 45. Mississippi - 5.13% 46. South Dakota - 5.13% 47. Kansas - 5.09% 48. Louisiana - 5.09% 49. Kentucky - 5.07% 50. Alabama - 4.81% ++ Legalized recreational marijuana in 2013 Number of Students 6,000 5,000 4,000 3,000 2,000 1,000 0 Drug -Related Suspensions/Expulsions 5,417 5,279 5,249 4,965 � . 4,933 3,984 3,988 3,833 3,779 3,736 Legalization Commercialization cP� e �� e gyp°' oti° otiti otiti o<3 otic� V 'ti '1. '1. 'L `Y ;1� ;L tio° ti°°� tioo'°' ryo°,�, ti000' tio�' Doti° ,you~ ,yo<) ,yoti'? Academic Years SOURCE: Colorado Department of Education, 10-Year Trend Data: State Suspension and Expulsion Incident Rates and Reasons SECTION 2: Youth Marijuana Use Page 140 387 of 669 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 3/September 2015 NOTE: THE COLORADO DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION INCLUDED ALL DRUGS IN THIS DATASET. HOWEVER, DEPARTMENT OFFICIALS REPORTED THAT MOST DRUG -RELATED SUSPENSIONS/EXPULSIONS REPORTED SINCE THE 2008/2009 ACADEMIC YEAR HAVE BEEN RELATED TO MARIJUANA.2 c .2 6,000 S 5,000 E 4,000 3,000 .° 2,000 01 1,000 ci)0 v� Average Drug -Related Suspensions/Expulsions 2004-2005 to 2008-2009 Academic Years 2009-2010 to 2013-2014 SOURCE: Colorado Department of Education, 10-Year Trend Data: State Suspension and Expulsion Incident Rates and Reasons SECTION 2: Youth Marijuana Use Page 141 388 of 669 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 3/September 2015 Percentage of Total Suspensions 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 Percentage of Total Suspensions in Colorado from 2004-2014 School Years cP`' 4do°� o°tip otiti °�� o�o� 1",1 Academic Years --0- Drug Violations -II-Alcohol Violations SOURCE: Colorado Department of Education, 10-Year Trend Data: State Suspension and Expulsion Incident Rates and Reasons Percentage of Total Expulsions 4.5r- 40 i _ ----- — - _ 38.8_-3L.6- - 35 _34.8 30 2G_2 yfi L'2ST 20 15 __-_ __. _.__ - -4-Drug Violations Percentage of Total Expulsions in Colorado from 2004-2014 School Years 23.7 24.3 Legalization 10 -Or-Alcohol Violations -- 3 5 21 2.02v2.. '.6 _28 3.077 0 Commercialization riZ' ,goo`' 19 (19 19 9 (19 (19 (°\ti ti°~� Academic Years SOURCE: Colorado Department of Education, 10-Year Trend Data: State Suspension and Expulsion Incident Rates and Reasons SECTION 2: Youth Marijuana Use Page 142 389 of 669 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 3/September 2015 40 30 25 23.3 23.4 24.1 23.5 241. 7N. Percentage of Total Referrals to Law Enforcement in Colorado from 2004-2014 School Years 34.1 32.3 30.828.9 - 20 Legalization 15 10 i.-411„3 5.6 4.9 5 Commercialization • '" 6.3 6.6 lir -6,3 8.0 7 40 6,43 6;\ e e e do 6' 0c6 (b• ,-1°\ 4\- Academic Years -4—Drug Violations —II—Alcohol Violations SOURCE: Colorado Department of Education, 10-Year Trend Data: State Suspension and Expulsion Incident Rates and Reasons Colorado Probation Average Percent Positive THC Urinalyses Ages 12 to 17 Years Old a) 35.00% ▪ 30.00% 0-• • 25.00°/0 20.00°/0 cu 15.00% 0.1 CI) 10 .00CY (10 ° ea t.," 5.00% < 0.00% 2006-2008 (Pre - Commercialization) 2009-2012 (Post - Commercialization) 2013-2014 (Legalization) SOURCE: State of Colorado Judicial Branch, Division of Probation Services SECTION 2: Youth Marijuana Use Page 43 390 of 669 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 3/September 2015 Colorado School Resource Officer Survey3 In June 2015, 95 school resource officers (SROs) completed a survey concerning marijuana at schools. The majority were assigned to high schools with an average tenure of six years as an SRO. They were asked for their professional opinion on a number of questions including: • Since the legalization of recreational marijuana, what impact has there been on marijuana -related incidents at your school? o 90 percent reported an increase in incidents o 9 percent reported no change in incidents o 1 percent reported a slight decrease in incidents • What were the most predominant marijuana violations on campus? o 51 percent reported possession of marijuana o 42 percent reported being under the influence during school hours o 4 percent reported selling marijuana to other students o 2 percent reported sharing marijuana with other students o 1 percent reported possession of marijuana -infused edibles Percent of Responses 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% Predominant Marijuana Violations, 2015 Student in possession of marijuana infused edibles other students Student Student selling Student under Student in sharing marijuana to the influence possession of marijuana with other students during school marijuana hours SOURCE: Colorado Association of School Resource Officers (CASRO) and Rocky Mountain HIDTA SECTION 2: Youth Marijuana Use Page 144 391 of 669 1 UJ The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 3/September 2015 • Where do the students get their marijuana? o 39 percent reported friends who obtain it legally o 30 percent reported from their parents o 18 percent reported from the black market o 6 percent reported from retail marijuana stores o 3 percent reported from medical marijuana cardholders o 2 percent reported from medical marijuana caregivers o 1 percent reported from medical marijuana dispensaries Percent of Responses 40% 35% 30 25% 20% 15% 10% 5% 0% Medical Marijuana Dispensaries Student Marijuana Source, 2015 Medical Marijuana Caregivers Medical Marijuana Cardholders Retail Marijuana Stores Black Market Parents Friend Who Obtained it i.egally SOURCE: Colorado Association of School Resource Officers (CASRO) and Rocky Mountain HIDTA Some Comments from School Resource Officers 6th Grade Users: "I have 6th graders that smoke marijuana before school. They steal it from their parents or older siblings." Pick Up Tool: "One junior boy, while in class and trying to pick up girls in his class. Offered to share marijuana edibles (Rice Krispy treats/fruity pebbles infused) to three girls in his class while asking for their phone numbers." SECTION 2: Youth Marijuana Use Page 145 392 of 669 rou The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 3/September 2015 Medical Marijuana Card for 18th Birthday: "During the spring I made contact with a student under the influence of marijuana with friends in an alley. After taking them back to my office to write citations. A female who was 18 years old had a marijuana card. She related that her parents took her to get it on her birthday. I advised her she had to be 21 regardless of her card." School to ER: Had two marijuana overdoses requiring ambulance transport to ER. Both incidents were 14 year old females." Increased Incidents: "Numbers of incidents are climbing each year in a school of 430. 2012-2013 (5 incidents) 2013-2014 (11 incidents) 2014-2015 (18 incidents)" 15-Year-Old Marijuana Card Holder: "15 year old with red card obtaining marijuana from friends in tobacco form. Attempted to give it to other females if they would smoke with him. Same student was caught with pipes one month before, the student attempted to fight with staff to keep them from searching him." 17-Year-Old Assaults Father: "17 year old male refused to hang up cell phone during class. Student caused disruption in class attempted to physically stop principal from taking his backpack subsequent search found marijuana in his backpack. Suspect later assaulted his father and was taken into custody." Father's Joint: "In April 2015, five middle school students were observed on the playground passing around what appeared to be a marijuana joint. When contacted, each admitted to consuming marijuana on campus. When asked were (sic) the marijuana was obtained, one of the students admitted taking it from his father." Vapor Pens: "Students smoking marijuana in class out of vapor pens. 8 year old found in possession of vapor pens and test positive for marijuana." School Counselor Survey4 In August 2015, 188 school counselors completed a survey concerning the legalization of marijuana at schools. The majority were assigned to high schools with SECTION 2: Youth Marijuana Use Page 146 393 of 669 roi The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 3/September 2015 an average tenure of ten years. They were asked for their professional opinion on a number of questions including: • Since the legalization of recreational marijuana, what impact has there been on marijuana -related incidents at your school? o 69 percent reported an increase in incidents o 30 percent reported no change in incidents o 2 percent reported a slight decrease in incidents • What were the most predominant marijuana violations on campus? o 51 percent reported being under the influence during school hours o 30 percent reported possession of marijuana o 9 percent reported possession of marijuana -infused edibles o 6 percent reported sharing marijuana with other students o 5 percent reported selling marijuana to other students Percent of Responses 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% Predominant Marijuana Violations, 2015 51% Student selling Student sharing Student in Student in Student under the marijuana to other marijuana with possession of possession of influence during students other students marijuana infused marijuana school hours edibles SOURCE Colorado School Counselor Association (CSCA) and Rocky Mountain HIDTA SECTION 2: Youth Marijuana Use Page 147 394 of 669 f UU The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 3/September 2015 • Where do the students get their marijuana? o 29 percent reported friends who obtain it legally o 25 percent reported from their siblings or other family members O 21 percent reported from their parents o 18 percent reported from the black market O 3 percent reported from retail marijuana stores O 2 percent reported from medical marijuana dispensaries O 1 percent reported from medical marijuana cardholders O 1 percent reported from medical marijuana caregivers Percent of Responses 30% 25% 20% 15% 10% 5% Medical Marijuana Cardholders Student Marijuana Source, 2015 Medical Marijuana Caregivers Medical Marijuana Dispensaries Retail Marijuana Stores Black Market Pcueilts Siblings/Other Friend who Family obtained it Members legally SOURCE Colorado School Counselor Association (CSCA) and Rocky Mountain HIDTA Some Comments from School Counselors Halls Reek of Pot After Lunch: • "Many kids come back from lunch highly intoxicated from marijuana use. Halls reek of pot, so many kids are high that it is impossible to apprehend all but the most impaired." • "They go off campus and smoke during lunch with friends. They will run home with friends during lunch and smoke then." SECTION 2: Youth Marijuana Use Page 1 48 395 of 669 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 3/September 2015 • "There have been several instances of students in their cars on lunch or during their off hours 'hotboxing' or smoking marijuana. Most students are seniors but on occasion, seniors will provide marijuana to 9th or 10th grade students." • "2014/2015 school year, several students caught coming back from off - campus lunch under the influence of marijuana." • "Had a student come back from lunch, teacher believed that they were high. Student was escorted to the office, student admitted they were indeed high to the administrator." • "Students are often referred after lunch (open campus) after they have been riding around smoking marijuana with their friends." • "More and more students are coming back to school high after lunch." • "In April 2015, students were going out for a break. 2-3 students smoked marijuana about a block away from school. They smelled like pot when they got back." Arrives at School Stoned: • "At the beginning of the second semester, three middle school boys were routinely arriving late at school, and noticeable intoxicated." • "We have middle school students who either come to school high, or have it on them in a bag. Or they have pipes on them." • "In May 2015, a teacher witnessed 2 seniors smoking marijuana while driving to school. One student admitted to having done so; the other denied it." • "Teaching a lesson in class during first period that started 7:30 AM and 2 students were already high in class." • "A male 13 y/o student fell asleep in several classes. He was interviewed by the school counselor and the RSO (sic). He was assessed as being high and admitted that he uses marijuana often before school. He steals it from his older brother." • "12 yr. old, sixth grader, was suspected of coming to summer school high. When confronted he told the teacher that he smoked it at home the night before but denied being high at the time. Later, he confirmed that he had smoked early that morning. The marijuana came from his mother's stash." New Use of Bathrooms: • "Students using in the bathroom." • "2 students were smoking marijuana in the restroom last year." • "8th grade male student had marijuana in his locker, classmates reported it. 8th grade female student smoked a joint in a school bathroom during school hours. Shared it with a friend." SECTION 2: Youth Marijuana Use Page 149 396 of 669 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 3/September 2015 • "7th grade girl last year had hidden marijuana and a pipe in the girl's restroom and told several friends who began getting bathroom break passes from various classrooms. Security noted an increased traffic flow to and from that restroom and found the weed and soon after the violators." It's Legal: • "3 or 4 times in the last school year, students have come to school under the influence after meeting at homes where parents were absent, sharing marijuana off campus and then bringing it on campus. 7th and 8th grade students have been involved, and most often their reaction when caught is 'it's legal'." • "I met with at least 5 students last year alone that have been showing significant signs of drug use or were caught and they all said they will not stop using weed on a daily basis. Their justification was it's fine because it's legal. If it's legal it's not as bad as what adults say about the risks." Just a Plant: • "In March of 2015 a fifth grade boy offered marijuana to another fifth grader on the playground. In October of 2014 a kindergarten girl described the pipe in her grandmother's car and the store where you go to buy pipes. In May of 2015 a first grade girl reported that her mom smokes weed in the garage. 'It's not a drug, it's just a plant'." Grades Decline: • "I would like to say that in general our Marijuana incidents have not gone up. We have a savvy population that knows to keep it away from school. However, I have seen a huge spike in talking with kids about it in my sessions. Last year I had two very intelligent students (above 4.0) that used marijuana 2-6 times a week. Both of them had grades decline and significant social emotional issues spike in the Spring of their Senior Year. They also both had violations at school." Dad Allows Pot Smoking: • "We had reports of two students (brothers) appear to be high at school. Our officer assessed both of them and discovered that their father, who had a medical marijuana card, was having them both "smoke a bowl" before school. He thought it would make their school day easier." SECTION 2: Youth Marijuana Use Page 150 397 of 669 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 3/September 2015 Parents High: • "At our elementary school, we have noticed an increased number of parents showing up to school high. Kids have also brought [marijuana] to school to show their friends." Difficulty in Assessment: • "For school personnel, it is more difficult to evaluate what substance a student is under the influence of. We can smell alcohol and smoked marijuana but the edibles and vapes are hard to detect." Warning: Drug Canines: • "I would like to just offer that we need policy that allows for more use of drug dogs and not having to forewarn students or parents when these dogs will be present. Students and especially dealers, the ones we need to catch, are very vigilant in making adjustments when these resources are used." SECTION 2: Youth Marijuana Use Page 151 398 of 669 eiptetel • ❑ O•wlplkpee • &rio. � andTMf o dMmri}MN dOtt enioidrd vdvornosll maid The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 3/September 2015 Youth Use Surveys Not Utilized and Why ❖ After careful analysis and consideration, Rocky Mountain HIDTA did not use the following datasets in this report because of the following reasons: Centers for Disease Control Youth Risk Behavior Survey (YRBS): In 2013, Colorado fell short of the required number of student responses and was, therefore, not included. Additionally, upon further review, it was discovered that since 1991 the state of Colorado has only been represented in the High School YRBS survey with weighted data four times. Since 1995, Colorado has only been represented in the Middle School YRBS survey by weighted data twice. States that participated in the 2013 Middle School and High School YRBS surveys are represented in dark blue in the below maps. It should be noted, in 2013, high schools in the following eight states were not included with high school data: California, Colorado, Oregon, Washington, Minnesota, Illinois, Iowa and Pennsylvania. Centers for Disease Control Youth Risk Behavior Survey 2013 YRBS Participation Map Middle Schools AWwMe dN MLaAyoTu.e CN119gLL M 174; OGGttd[du0b0 M 1TM D1WU R h�Ao Brd eu t/.ft w's•1rOtl •yq 1MadA•d Wleds �� ; fnC�CxiYrt „,1111 • Aeel[n•nro • Geno • •eltrn W0. V_ •.W High Schools Ke001p07M LAhsOIOtoG Sow wor! . 1. AAp11t Sol)*, CA i dI••••••h•nfts 0 1•w•aAMtbWe.t> ❑ bid rot p•k9pyir OwM.146•1 • Wsyysddf.o4SnE1101.d =.blq•Aro mlNo6f 0 Uoft•I*40101,t1e•e44u4 ••••••r wn snub Oio v4 Mr�)hb [auy,R • Ar••m•S.eO • f1F0 • 141•e•0e1.1•Yyq • NI. • •1151.5 SOURCE: Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Adolescent and School Health, YRBSS Participation Maps and History<http://www.cdc.gov/healthyyouth/data/yrbs/participation.htm> Monitoring the Future (MTF) Study: Monitoring The Future is designed to be nationally -represented and not state -represented. MTF does not provide usable estimates for the specific state of Colorado because of the state's relatively small size. Colorado is only 1.6 percent of the total U.S. population; thus, the sampling would only SECTION 2: Youth Marijuana Use Page 152 399 of 669 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 3/September 2015 be 1.6 percent of Colorado schools (400) or about 6 schools per year. Since 2010, the survey sampled an average of 4.6 Colorado schools. In 2014 and 2015, there were four schools surveyed each year of which three were eighth grade. Therefore, the MTF study is not useful for state data pertaining to Colorado for school -age drug use data and trends.6 Healthy Kids Colorado Survey (HKCS): The Healthy Kids Colorado Survey is voluntary, self -reported health information from Colorado middle and high school students. However, this survey notably changed in 2013. "Sample sizes from 2005-2011 ranged from about 700 to 1,500 students" whereas "sample size for 2013 for current and lifetime use was about 25,000 high school students." Additionally, the HKCS "methodology changed in 2013 to include charter schools and to expand the sample size." Rocky Mountain HIDTA did not feel it was consistent to compare data pre-2013 with the new method of collecting data.' Related Material Denver Public School Marijuana Arrests Increased 39 Percent: Since marijuana was legalized in 2013, Denver Police Department reported 154 arrests in 2013 compared to 111 in 2012 which is a 39 percent increase. Students who talked to 9News from one high school are quoted as saying:8 • "[Legalization] does make it more acceptable because a lot of people couldn't get it before, but now they have uncles or cousins or whatever that are old enough to get it, and they can just get it for them." • Another student saying he sees pot use frequently, "around the parks, walking on the streets, at the bus, in the bus. Everywhere." • Another student saying that students have easier access to the drug than they did before made the comment, "It's Colorado." A student commented, "Yeah, some kids just come to class all stoned." "[Teachers] don't really do nothing. They just look at them. Give them a weird look and then just walk away." School workers say it can be a tough call to report cases like that. Kids suspected of being high that are not disrupting classes, just quietly zoned out at their desk. Valley Schools See Increase in Marijuana -Related Offenses: "Administrators at the Roaring Fork Valley high schools have seen an uptick in marijuana -related infractions over the first full year of the drug being legalized for adult recreational use, causing some changes in the curriculum to better inform students about how pot can adversely affect the teenage brain." School District Superintendent Diana Sirko said in SECTION 2: Youth Marijuana Use Page 153 400 of 669 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 3/September 2015 comparison to the last three to five years there has been a "dramatic increase" in infractions during the recently -completed school year. She states, "I didn't think [legalization] would affect things any more than alcohol does, but we've been more impacted than we first thought. Because of the fact that [marijuana] is now legal, it's viewed differently by kids... It's the availability and overall mindset that leads to problems."9 School Drug Incidents Raise Questions on Colorado Pot Policy: "Hundreds of Colorado's middle -school students got caught with drugs at school last year, setting a decade -high record while raising questions about the impact of the state's legal marijuana industry." School -based experts believe that the 24 percent increase in middle school drug reports directly relate to the legal marijuana industry. Denver Public Schools saw a 7 percent increase from 452 in school year 2012/13 to 482 in school year 2013/14. "The 951 middle -school drug violations across Colorado was the highest tally in a decade." School officials say that the greater availability and acceptance appears to be prompting more kids to try marijuana. Aurora P.D. School Resource Officer Susan Condreay stated, "I would say that at any given time, any day of the week, there are probably about 10% of the kids in the high school that are under the influence of something."1° Chuck Frank: Study Shatters Claims Marijuana is Harmless: An article in the scientific journal Addiction by Professor Wayne Hall of King's College in London, who is also the World Health Organization drug advisor, "built a compelling case with regard to the negative and adverse effects of cannabis." Among the professor's findings was that regular use, particularly among teens, leads to long-term mental health problems as well as addiction.71 • "One in six teenagers who regularly smoke the drug become dependent on it." • Cannabis doubles the risk of developing psychotic disorders, including schizophrenia. • "Cannabis users do worse at school. Heavy use in adolescence appears to impair intellectual development." • "One in ten adults who regularly smoke marijuana become dependent and are more likely to go on to harder drugs." • "Driving after smoking marijuana doubles the risk of car crashes, which increases substantially if the driver also drank alcohol." • "A study released (April 23, 2014) by the journal of the American Heart Association revealed a relationship between cardiovascular disease and cannabis use in regular marijuana users." SECTION 2: Youth Marijuana Use Page 154 401 of 669 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 3/September 2015 This New Study is Bad News if You're a Marijuana Supporter: Researchers at Northwestern University released a study in the journal Hpppocampus related to some findings regarding heavy use of marijuana on teenagers' long-term memory. The study examined daily marijuana users who began at the age of 16 compared to the same age young adults who never used marijuana. Researchers used an MRI scan of the area of the brain responsible for long-term memory retention. Researchers also conducted MRI scans for subjects in their early 20's who were two years removed from heavy marijuana use. The study showed an "oddly shaped hippocampus" in heavy marijuana users that accompanied long-term memory test scores 18 percent lower than those who had not used marijuana. One of the senior authors stated, "The memory processes that appear to be affected by cannabis are ones that we use every day to solve common problems and to sustain our relationships with friends and family." This apparently was the first study that confirmed the relationship between heavy marijuana use and a misshapen hippocampus that lead to poor long-term memory function.12 Impact of Youth Marijuana Use: A study published in the journal Lancet Psychiatry by Dr. Muiris Houston provides some startling findings concerning marijuana use among youth. • Daily users of marijuana prior to the age of 17 are 60 percent less likely to complete high school or get a university degree than those who do not use marijuana. • Teens who are daily users of marijuana are seven times more likely to attempt suicide. • Teens who use marijuana on a daily basis are eight times more likely to use other drugs later in life.13 Teen Marijuana Use and the Risk of Psychosis: "Doctors in Germany have noted an alarming rise in psychotic episodes linked to excessive marijuana use among young people, which follows other studies around the world raising alarms." "The number of patients admitted with psychotic episodes after having consumed cannabis has more than tripled in Germany over the last 15 years, from 3,392 in 2000 to 11,708 in 2013." "More than half the patients are younger than 25."74 Pot Smoking Can Damage Developing Brains "Scientists believe that the increased potency leads to abnormalities in the shape, density, and volume of the nucleus accumbens, the walnut -shaped area of the brain that's associated with pleasure and pain. The nucleus accumbens "Is the core of motivation," says study co-author Hans Breiter. J.M. [Gilman et al., Cannabis Use Is Quantitatively Associated with Nucleus Accumbens and Amygdala Abnormalities in Young Adult Recreational Users, Journal of SECTION 2: Youth Marijuana Use Page 155 402 of 669 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 3/September 2015 Neuroscience (Neurobiology of Disease section), 34 (2014), 5529-5538] "This is a part of the brain you do not want to mess around with."75 Teens That Smoke Pot Could End Up Shorter: "Researchers at a university in Pakistan studied levels of hormones linked to growth and puberty in the blood of 217 boys addicted to marijuana and 220 who didn't smoke at all." They found certain hormones linked to puberty were higher among pot users but growth hormone levels were significantly lower. When checking back years later, the researchers found non - marijuana users were 9 pounds heavier and 4.6 inches taller on average than their marijuana -smoking counterparts. The scientists, who presented their findings at a conference in Ireland, said that this might help provide some insight into the effects of drug use on growth and development.16 Medical Marijuana May Pose Risk to Teens: Study: A study by a professor in the School of Nursing at the University of Michigan showed that teens who legally were using medical marijuana were ten times more likely to say they were addicted than those that got the drugs illegally. The study author, Carol Boyd, stated, "I think that medical marijuana laws are failed policy and that these data lend support to my position."77 Study Identifies Teens at Risk for Hashish Use: "The recent increase in popularity of marijuana use coupled with more liberal state -level policies has begun to change the landscape of adolescent marijuana use. More potent forms of marijuana, such as hashish, may present a threat to adolescent health." A study by researchers connected to the New York University Center for Drug Use and HIV Research was one of the first to examine the prevalence and correlation between hash use among a sample of U.S. high school students. One of the researchers reports that one out of ten teens reported using hashish and that marijuana and hashish bear the same risk factors for regular users but are much stronger from hashish, which is a more potent form of marijuana.18 THC Levels in Teens: In a Colorado Springs Gazette Op/Ed dated June 21, 2015 entitled "THC extracts concentrate problems: For example, the average level of THC found in the urine of about 5,000 adolescents ages 12-19 by researchers at the University of Colorado jumped from 358 nanograms per milliliter in 2007 through 2009 - just before the state's boom in medical marijuana dispensaries - to 536 milliliters from 2010 through 2013."19 Pot Unsafe to Teen and Young Adult Brains Under Construction: "Even moderate marijuana use among teens and young people was shown in a study this year to cause abnormalities in the developing brain. Yet as Colorado and other states legalize SECTION 2: Youth Marijuana Use Page 156 403 of 669 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 3/September 2015 recreational pot use, the public perception is that it is generally safe." A study published in the Journal of Neuroscience in April 2014, conducted by the Harvard Medical School and Northwestern University Feinberg School of Medicine, used brain scans on young adults who smoked marijuana moderately. The researchers found changes in the volume, shape and density in the regions of the brain responsible for judgment, motivation, decision -making and emotional behavior. They found that the more these young adults smoked, the greater the abnormalities.20 Pot Used to be Pretty Harmless, But It's Plenty Dangerous Today: Dr. Grace M. McGorrian, in a Pittsburgh Post -Gazette editorial, compares the impact of marijuana from the 1960s and '70s to the marijuana of today. She states, "Modern marijuana has been genetically modified to be more potent — six to 10 times higher in THC." The article goes on to describe experience with marijuana users in that they have a greater distortion of reality and consciousness and also sometimes appear to be very sedated and unsteady on their feet. She mentions poor balance and compromised memory even when no longer high. She mentions that she has seen THC levels rise from "200 nanograms per milliliter to 500, to 1,000, to 1,750 (I have seen all these levels.)" Dr. McGorrian also cites that 50 percent of those using high -potency marijuana daily will experience withdrawal symptoms to include poor sleep, decline in appetite, possible vomiting and stomach pain. She cites anxiety, irritability increases and some experience muscle twitching and limb spasms. She says the symptoms will clear in less than a week but the experience is rough and that many heavy users resume smoking mid -withdrawal. Dr. McGorrian is board -certified in adult and forensic psychiatry.21 Under the Influence of Parents: A survey conducted by the Hazelden Betty Ford Foundation's Center for Public Advocacy show that children of parents who have used marijuana are three times more likely to use it themselves. This nationwide survey was conducted of individuals between the ages of 18 and 25 to get a better understanding of marijuana using habits and attitudes. The survey found that 72 percent of children who reported their parents have used, or are using, marijuana have in fact used it themselves. That compares to less than 20 percent of children whose parents have not used marijuana. The survey also found that 15 percent stated they used marijuana before the age of 14 and about 35 percent between the ages of 14 and 16. The survey also found that the majority of young adult marijuana users (6 out of 10) did not think marijuana was addictive and didn't damage the brain. Almost half of those felt that eating marijuana was safer than smoking it. In Colorado, close to 49 percent of youth surveyed admitted they had used marijuana compared to approximately 41 percent nationwide. In Colorado, 24 percent of youth said they used marijuana daily compared to about 19 percent for the rest of the country.22 SECTION 2: Youth Marijuana Use Page 157 404 of 669 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 3/September 2015 Marijuana Exposure Among Children Younger Than Six Years in the United States: "The rate of exposure to marijuana among young children nationwide is rising. Young children in states where laws allow sale and use of marijuana face significantly elevated risks of exposure and poisoning."23 Sources 1 National Survey on Drug Use and Health Model 2013, <http://www.SAMHSA.gov> 2 Tatum, Christine, "Pot plagues Colorado schools," December 2013, <http://drthurstone.corn/pot-plagues-Colorado-schools/>, accessed December 2013 3 School Resource Officer survey by Rocky Mountain HIDTA 4 School Counselor survey by Rocky Mountain HIDTA 5 Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Adolescent and School Health, YRBSS Participation Maps and History, <http://www.cdc.gov/healthyyouth/data/yrbs/participation.htm>, accessed August 2015 6 University of Michigan, Institute for Social Research, Monitoring the Future Study University of Colorado Denver, Healthy Kids Colorado Survey, Marijuana Overview of 2013 Data, <http://www.ucdenver.edu/academics/colleges/PublicHealth/community/CEPEG/Unify outh/Documents/Marijuana%200verview.pdf>, accessed August 2015 8 Brandon Rittiman, KUSA, December 16, 2014, "DPD revised data on Denver school pot arrests", <http://www.9news.com/story/news/education/2014/12/15/pot-arrests- denver-schools/20459607/>, accessed December 16, 2014 9 Collin Szewczyk, Aspen Daily News Online, June 9, 2015, "Valley schools see increase in marijuana -related offenses, " <http://www.aspendailynews.com/print/166966>, accessed June 9, 2015 SECTION 2: Youth Marijuana Use Page 158 405 of 669 LI The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 3/September 2015 70 Katie Kuntz, Rocky Mountain PBS I -News, USAToday.com, February 18, 2015, "School drug incidents raise questions on Colo. pot policy", <http://www.usatoday.corn/story/news/nation/2015/02/18/colo-middle-school-drugs- marijuana-violations/23620235/>, accessed February 19, 2015 " Chuck Frank, The Union, April 4, 2015, "Chuck Frank: Study shatters claims marijuana is harmless," <http://www.theunion.com/opinion/columns/15021803- 113/chuck-frank-study-shatters-claims-marijuana-is-harmless>, accessed April 5, 2015 12 Sean Williams, The Motley Fool, April 12, 2015, "This New Study Is Bad News if You're a Marijuana Supporter," <http://www.fool. com/investing/general/2015/04/12/this-new-study-is-bad-news-if- youre-a-marijuana-su.aspx>, accessed April 12, 2015 73 Muiris Houston, September 15, 2014, Irishtimes.com, "Medical Matters: The health and social benefits of abstaining from cannabis", <http://www.irishtimes. com/life-and-style/health-family/medical-matters-the-health- and-social-benefits-of-abstaining-from-cannabis-1.1924047>, accessed September 16, 2014 14 Freia Peters, Worldcrunch.com, May 3, 2015, "Teen Marijuana Use And The Risks of Psychosis", <http://www.worldcrunch.com/culture-society/teen-marijuana-use-and- the-risks-of-psychosis/drug-health-addiction-cannabis- europe/c3s18633/#.VZ2EcsbJCos>, accessed May 4, 2015 75 THE WEEK (Health & Science), Volume 14/Issue 701 December 31, 2014, pg. 9 16 Arden Dier, Newser Staff, newser.com, May 19, 2015, "Smoked Pot as a Teen? You Could Have Been Taller," <http://www.newser.corn/story/207051/smoked-pot-as-a- teen-you-could-have-been-taller.html>, accessed May 19, 2015 17 Robert Preidt, WebMD News from HealthDay, July 24, 2014, "Medical Marijuana May Pose Risk to Teens: Study," <http://teens.webmd.corn/news/20150724/medical- marijuana-may-pose-risk-to-teens-study-suggests>, accessed July 24, 2015 18 MedicalXpress (as provided by New York University), April 13, 2015, "Study identifies teens at risk for hashish use," <http://medicalxpress.com/news/2015-04-teens- hashish.html>, accessed April 13, 2015 SECTION 2: Youth Marijuana Use Page 159 406 of 669 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 3/September 2015 79 Wayne Laugesen and Pula Davis, The Gazette editorial board, June 212015, "Clearing the Haze/THC extracts concentrate problems," <http://gazette.com/clearing- the-haze-thc-extracts-concentrate-problems/article/1554097>, accessed June 22, 2015 20 Electra Draper, The Denver Post, December 26, 2014, "A Year of Legal Pot/Pot unsafe for teen and young adult brains under construction," <http://www. denverpost. com/p otannivers ary%ci_27174681 /pot-uns afe-teen-and-young- adult-brains-under>, accessed July 14, 2015 21 Dr. Grace M. McGorrian, Pittsburgh Post -Gazette, May 24, 2015, "Pot used to be pretty harmless, but it's plenty dangerous today," <http://www.post- gazette.corn/opinion/Op-Ed/2015/05/24/A-tale-oftwo-reefers/stories/201505240065>, accessed May 25, 2015 22 Hazelden Betty Ford Center Foundation, Recovery News, September 18, 2014, "Under the Influence of Parents - Children of marijuana users much more likely to start using marijuana at a young age, new Hazelden Betty Ford Foundation survey finds," <https://www.hazelden.org/web/public/children-of-marijuana-users.page>, accessed September 18, 2014 23 Bridget Onders, BS, et al, "Marijuana Exposure Among Children Younger Than Six Years in the United States," Clinical Pediatrics, June 10, 2015, 1-9 SECTION 2: Youth Marijuana Use Page 160 407 of 669 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 3/September 2015 SECT1ON 3: Adult Marijuana Use Introduction The following section reviews rates of marijuana use by adults in Colorado and nationally. Data sets examine reported use "within the last 30 days" as opposed to "lifetime" use. Use of the 30-day data provides a more accurate picture and is classified as current use. The lifetime data collection model includes those who were typically infrequent or experimental users of marijuana. Data comparisons are from years 2006 through 2013. The information compares the early medical marijuana era (2006 - 2008), the medical marijuana commercialization and expansion era (2009 - current) and the recreational marijuana era (2013 - current) in Colorado. • 2006 - 2008: There were between 1,000 and 4,800 medical marijuana cardholders and no known dispensaries operating in Colorado. • 2009 - Current: There were over 108,000 medical marijuana cardholders and 532 licensed dispensaries operating in Colorado by the end of 2012. See the introduction at the beginning of this report for more details on the commercialization and explosion of Colorado's medical marijuana trade. • 2013 - Current: In November 2012, Colorado voters passed Constitutional Amendment 64 which legalized marijuana for recreational purposes for anyone over 21 years of age. The amendment also allowed for licensed marijuana retail stores, cultivation operations and edibles manufacturing. SECTION 3: Adult Marijuana Use Page 161 408 of 669 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 3/September 2015 Some Findings • College Age Adults (ages 18 to 25 years old) Current Marijuana Use 2013 o Colorado average — 29.05 percent o National average —18.91 percent ■ Colorado was ranked 2nd in the nation for current marijuana use among college -age adults (53.62 percent higher than the national average). • In 2006, Colorado was ranked 8th in the nation for current marijuana use among college -age adults. • Between pre- and post -commercialization of medical marijuana, there was a 17 percent increase in college -age (ages 18 to 25 years old) monthly marijuana use. There was an 11 percent increase in just one year after legalization of recreational marijuana in 2013. • There was a 49 percent increase in 18 to 25-year-old probationers testing positive for marijuana since marijuana was legalized for recreational purposes. • Adults (ages 26+ years old) Current Marijuana Use 2013 o Colorado average —10.13 percent o National average — 5.45 percent ■ Colorado was ranked 5th in the nation for current marijuana use among adults (85.87 percent higher than the national average) • In 2006, Colorado was ranked 8th in the nation for current marijuana use among adults • Between pre- and post -commercialization of medical marijuana, there was a 32 percent increase in adult (26+ years old) monthly marijuana use. There was a 27 percent increase in just one year after legalization of recreational marijuana in 2013. • The top ten states for the highest rate of current marijuana use were all medical - marijuana states. o College age rate (18 to 25 years old): Top ten states average of 26.31 percent compared to national average of 18.91 percent o Adult rate (26+ years old): Top ten states average of 9.28 percent compared to national average of 5.45 percent SECTION 3: Adult Marijuana Use Page 162 409 of 669 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 3/September 2015 • There has been an 87 percent increase in 26+ years old probationers testing positive for marijuana since marijuana was legalized for recreational use. NOTE: SAMSHA RELEASED NATIONAL DATA ON DRUG USE FOR 2014 IN SEPTEMBER 2015. HOWEVER, STATE DRUG USE DATA FOR 2014 WILL NOT BE AVAILABLE UNTIL TOWARD THE END OF THE YEAR 2015. Data College Age (18 to 25 Years Old) Average Percent 30.00% 25.00% 20.00% 15.00% 10.00% 5.00% 0.00% Average Past Month Use of Marijuana College Age (18 to 25 Years Old) 29.0b% 2006-2008 2009-2012 2013 (Pre -Commercialization) (Post -Commercialization) (Legalization) SOURCE: SAMHSA.gov, National Survey on Drug Use and Health, 2006-2013 SECTION 3: Adult Marijuana Use Page 163 410 of 669 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 3/September 2015 Average Percentage College Age (18 to 25 Years Old) Past Month Marijuana Use Commercialization 30 25 20 15 10 5 Legalization u .. 2006 2007 2008 ..,.e,,.., 2009 .��. 2010 „�„�,.r 2011 . ,.,.,■.,,� 2012 ,,�,�.,��. 2013 • National Average 16.42 16.34 16.45 17.42 18.39 18.78 18.89 18.91 ',Colorado Average 21.43 22.21 23.44 24.28 26.35 27.26 26.81 29.05 SOURCE: SAMHSA.gov, National Survey on Drug Use and Health, 2006 - 2013 Prevalence of Past 30-Day Marijuana Use, 18 to 25 Years Old, 2006-2012 35.00% w 30.00% 3 c 25.00% 20.00% 0.a, 15.00% or) d 10.00% d 5.00% 0.00% United States Colorado Denver Metro 12006-2008 12008-2010 r 2010-2012 SOURCE: Denver Epidemiology Workgroup (DEWG), Denver Office of Drug Strategy, October 29, 2014 and the National Survey of Drug Use and Health, Sub -state Estimates 2006-2012 SECTION 3: Adult Marijuana Use Page 164 411 of 669 1 VJ The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 3/September 2015 States for Past Month Marijuana Use College Age (18 to 25 Years Old), 20131 Top 10 Bottom 10 (Medical Marijuana States in 2013) (Non -Medical Marijuana States in 2013) National Rate = 18.91% 1. Rhode Island - 29.79% 2. ++Colorado - 29.05% 3. Vermont - 28.74% 4. New Hampshire - 27.77% 5. Massachusetts - 26.64% 6. ++Washington - 25.56% 7. Maine - 24.71% 8. Connecticut - 24.41% 9. Oregon - 23.39% 10. Montana - 23.04% ++ Legalized recreational marijuana in 2013 NumberPositive 30,000 25,000 20,000 15,000 10,000 5,000 13,125 10,979 41. Oklahoma-14.43% 42. Arkansas-14.28% 43. Wyoming -14.12% 44. Idaho -14.05% 45. North Dakota -14.04% 46. Alabama -13.93% 47. Texas -13.88% 48. South Dakota -12.68% 49. Kansas-12.23% 50. Utah -10.91% State of Colorado Probation Number of Positive THC Urinalyses Ages 18 to 25 Years Old Commercialization 20,019 16,246 Legalization 17,60117,234 1 25,606 22,160 ,099 5,987 7,193 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 SOURCE: State of Colorado Judicial Branch, Division of Probation Services SECTION 3: Adult Marijuana Use Page 165 412 of 669 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 3/September 2015 Adults (26+ Years Old) Average Percent 12.00% 10.00% 8.00% 6.00°I° 4. 00% 2.00% 0.00% Average Past Month Use of Marijuana Adults (Age 26+ Years Old) 7.98% 6.03% (32%lucrease) (27%Increase) 10.13% 2006-2008 2009-2012 2013 (Pre -Commercialization) (Post -Commercialization) (Legalization) SOURCE: SAMHSA.gov, National Survey on Drug Use and Health, 2006-2013 Average Percentage Adult (Age 26+ Years Old) Past Month Marijuana Use Legalization 12 Commercialization 4 10 II 8 0 2 2006 2007 2008 2009 - 2010 2011 2012 2013 II National Average 4.1 4.02 4.06 4.42 4.68 4.8 5.05 5.45 ■ Colorado Average 5.32 5.88 6.88 7.31 8.86 8.19 7.63 10.13 SOURCE: SAMHSA.gov, National Survey on Drug Use and Health, 2006-2013 SECTION 3: Adult Marijuana Use Page 166 413 of 669 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 3/September 2015 Prevalence of Past 30-Day Marijuana Use, 26+ Years Old, 2006-2012 12.00% w 0 a, a) 6.00% as 4.00% ar 1 d 2.00% 10.00°i° 8.00% 0.00% United States Colorado ■ 2006-2008 ■ 2008-2010 r 2010-2012 Denver Metro SOURCE: Denver Epidemiology Workgroup (DEWG), Denver Office of Drug Strategy, October 29, 2014 and the National Survey of Drug Use and Health, Sub -state Estimates 2006-2012 States for Past Month Marijuana Use Adults 26 Years Old and Older, 20131 Top 10 Bottom 10 (Medical Marijuana States in 2013) (Non -Medical Marijuana States in 2013) National Rate = 5.45% 1. Rhode Island-11.18% 2. Alaska-10.60% 3. ++Washington-10.39% 4. Oregon-10.37% 5. ++Colorado -10.13% 6. Vermont - 8.88% 7. Montana - 8.44% 8. Maine - 7.95% 9. Michigan - 7.64% 10. New Mexico - 7.23% 41. South Dakota - 3.67% 42. **New Jersey - 3.64% 43. Texas - 3.62% 44. West Virginia -3.57% 45. Kentucky - 3.53% 46. Alabama - 3.41% 47. Louisiana - 3.33% 48. Mississippi - 3.26% 49. North Dakota - 3.26% 50. Kansas - 2.90% ++ Legalized recreational marijuana in 2013 ** First dispensary opened in December 2012 SECTION 3: Adult Marijuana Use Page 167 414 of 669 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 3/September 2015 NumberPositive 35,000 30,000 25,000 20,000 15,000 10,000 5,000 0 State of Colorado Probation Number of Positive THC Urinalyses Ages 26+ Years Old Le Commercialization 33,303 alizatio i 111 17,83016,55617,773 10,202 6,854 •• 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 SOURCE: State of Colorado Judicial Branch, Division of Probation Services Colorado Adult Marijuana Use Demographics2 According to the Colorado Behavior Risk Factor Surveillance System, 2014: • 13.6 percent of adults (18+ years old) are current users of marijuana • Approximately 1 out of 3 current users report using marijuana daily • A little less than 1 in 5 (18.8 percent) report driving after using marijuana • Highest current use demographics: o Younger adults (18 to 24 years old) o Less than high school education o Lower household income o Black o Gay/Lesbian/Bisexual adults o Men • Three highest current use areas in Colorado: o Boulder 18.9 percent o Denver 18.5 percent o Mountain Area West of Denver 15.6 percent SECTION 3: Adult Marijuana Use Page 168 415 of 669 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 3/September 2015 Related Material Marijuana Intoxication Blamed for More Deaths, Injuries: CBS4 Investigates reporter Brian Maass, in May of 2015, did a report on marijuana intoxication and deaths. One case cited was an 18-year-old former outstanding soccer player (Daniel Juarez) who was smoking marijuana with a friend and subsequently told the friend he did not want anymore because he was too high. According to witnesses, he began acting irrationally, running wild, stripping off his clothes and went into an apartment. He then got a knife and stabbed himself 20 times, one of which pierced his heart. The autopsy report showed 38.2 nanograms of THC in his blood at the time of death. The level set for impaired driving by the state of Colorado is 5 nanograms. A second case cited was a University of Wyoming 19-year-old student (Levy Pongi) who was visiting Denver. Apparently he and his friends were ingesting marijuana edibles when the student began acting irrationally by upending furniture, tipping over lamps then rushing out on the hotel balcony and jumping to his death. This student had 7.2 nanograms of THC in his blood at time of death. A third case cited was a wife (Kristine Kirk) who called 911 to report her husband (Richard Kirk) was acting erratically after eating marijuana edibles. While she was on the phone, her husband shot and killed her in front of their three children. The husband's lawyer claimed he was not responsible for his actions due to "involuntary" intoxication. A fourth case cited was a 17-year-old Boulder high school student (Brant Clark) who committed suicide. According to his mother he had consumed a large amount of marijuana at a party and then suffered major psychotic episodes requiring emergency care at two hospitals over a three-day period. Three days later he took his own life leaving behind a note that said, "Sorry for what I have done. I wasn't thinking the night I smoked myself out." This case occurred in 2007 prior to the commercialization of medical marijuana. A fifth case cited was an individual (Tron Doshe) who was returning home from a Colorado Rockies game and had lost his keys. He attempted to climb the outside of the apartment building to reach his balcony when he fell to his death. This death was ruled an accident. The autopsy report showed that this individual had 27.3 nanograms of marijuana in his system, 5 times over Colorado's legal limit and no other drugs were found in his system. The last case cited was a college student (Luke Goodman) who was on a skiing vacation with his family in Keystone, ingested marijuana edibles and subsequently shot himself to death. The autopsy report showed that he had 3.1 nanograms of THC in his system but that family members said he acted extremely irrational after ingesting the edibles. SECTION 3: Adult Marijuana Use Page 169 416 of 669 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 3/September 2015 Doctor Chris Colwell, chief of Emergency Medicine at Denver Health Medical Center, said, "Since the legalization of marijuana in Colorado, he has seen more and more cases like these of people who have ingested marijuana making poor decisions, decisions they would not otherwise make." He said, "In some cases they will ingest marijuana and behave in a way we would describe as psychotic." Dr. Colwell goes on to state several times each week they see people at the emergency department who have ingested marijuana and are acting suicidal. He states that they have to be restrained to ensure they are not a danger to themselves or other people. Dr. Colwell recalls one example in which a man dressed as Super Man ingested marijuana edibles and then jumped off a balcony as if he could fly. Although the man survived, he suffered several fractures.3 Marijuana Edibles Blamed for Keystone Death: Luke Goodman, a 23-year-old college graduate was on a two -week ski vacation with his family. He and a cousin purchased marijuana edibles and marijuana. They began ingesting the edible marijuana. Apparently Goodman consumed several peach tart candies and several hours later was reported to be jittery, incoherent and talking non -sensibly. His cousin reports that he made eye contact but didn't see them. His cousin described him as "pretty weird and relatively incoherent. It was almost like something else was speaking through him." Apparently the family left the condo and Luke Goodman retrieved a handgun he traveled with and shot himself to death. His cousin and family members referred to him as well -adapted, well -adjusted with no signs of depression or suicidal thoughts. His cousin said that, "He was the happiest guy in the world. He had everything going for him."45,6 Hiker Falls to His Death: Twenty-one year old Justin Bondi fell 150 feet to his death while hiking with a friend. According to the friend, on May 3, 2015 they stopped to eat sandwiches while hiking. The friend said that Bondi, "suddenly started shaking" and then fell to his death. The friend later acknowledged to investigators that they had smoked marijuana before embarking on their hike. The autopsy report showed marijuana, a metabolic of cocaine and Xanax. "A 'marijuana drink' and a 'metal tool commonly used in association with marijuana' were also found at the scene according to the police report."7 Comedian Takes Too Much of Colorado Marijuana: "Comedian Ralphie May was escorted by police out of his concert venue on Thursday night after he allegedly indulged in too many marijuana -infused edibles and 'lost the plot' on stage." Apparently the 42-year-old entertainer was so high that he struggled to make it onto the stage. While trying to continue, he apparently couldn't put a sentence together, had trouble finishing a joke and constantly lost his place. Obviously the audience was not SECTION 3: Adult Marijuana Use Page 170 417 of 669 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 3/September 2015 happy and demanded refunds. This took place at Avalon Theater in Grand Junction, Colorado.' Colorado Adult Marijuana Use Now Almost Double the National Average: "A new statewide study funded by the Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment found that 13.6% of Colorado adults are regular users of marijuana - almost double the rate (7.4%) of the entire country, according to recent Health and Human Services studies." "Denver is home to the most number of marijuana stores - and leads the state with 18.5% of adults as current users."9 Marijuana Use Increases in Colorado, According to New Federal Survey: "As marijuana legalization took hold in Colorado, the estimated percentage of regular cannabis users in the state jumped to the second -highest level in the country, according to new federal stats." "Only Rhode Island topped Colorado in the percentage of residents who reported using marijuana as frequently."70 Colorado Partly Blamed as Pot Use Up: "An increasing number of visitors to Yellowstone National Park are being prosecuted for possession of small amounts of medical and recreational pot, which remains illegal on federal land. Park rangers attribute the trend to ignorance of federal law and the growing prevalence of legal pot in other states, including neighboring Colorado, which has legal medical and recreational marijuana. The U.S. attorney's office prosecuted 21 marijuana cases from Yellowstone in 2010 and 52 in 2014. As of December 17th, the office had handled 80 cases in 2014. Those convicted of misdemeanor possession typically receive $1,000 fines."11 Study Shows Increased Adult Marijuana Use and Binge Drinking in States That Legalize Medical Marijuana: "Researchers from Emory's [University] Rollins School of Public Health found an increase in adult marijuana use and binge drinking after the implementation of medical marijuana laws (MML) in ten states that permit marijuana use for medical purposes." Dr. Heife Wen, PhD states, "These potential public health consequences may impose considerable economic and social costs on the society."12 Cannabis Smokers Warned They Risk Poorer Exam Grades: "After studying data on more than 54,000 course grades achieved by students from around the world who were enrolled at Maastricht University [Netherlands] before and after the restrictions were introduced, the economists came to a striking conclusion." [Before and after the restrictions were introduced, for certain out -of -country students from buying marijuana.] In a paper presented to the Royal Economic Society conference in Manchester, the economists revealed that those who could no longer legally buy SECTION 3: Adult Marijuana Use Page 171 418 of 669 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 3/September 2015 cannabis did better in their studies. University economist Olivier Marie stated, "The effects we find are large, consistent and statistically very significant." The economist goes on, "In line with how THC consumption affects cognitive functioning, we find that performance gains are larger for courses that require more numerical/mathematical skills."13 Marijuana -Using Employees: According to Quest Diagnostics: "Drug use costs the U.S. economy billions of dollars annually. According to the 1998 report by the Department of Labor, 73 percent of all current drug users aged 18 and older were employed. This calculates to 6.7 million full-time workers and 1.6 million part-time workers. Marijuana use among employees can lead to lower productivity, increased workplace accidents and injuries, increased absenteeism and lower morale." "According to the U.S. Department of Labor, drug abuse in the workplace costs employers approximately $81 billion each year in lost productivity."74 Drug Tests in the Workforce: "Quest Diagnostics' Drug Testing Index showed that, in 2013, positive drug test results in the workforce for marijuana increased nationwide by 6.2 percent. This is the first increase in positive reported drug tests in a decade. Positive tests for marijuana were dramatically higher in the two states with legal recreational marijuana. The marijuana positivity rates increased 20 percent in Colorado and 23 percent in Washington."15 Sources 1 National Survey on Drug Use and Health (NSDUH), Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration (reports 2006 through 2013) 2 Colorado Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System, "Marijuana Use in Colorado," Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment Brian Maass, CBS4 Investigates, May 18, 2015, "Marijuana Intoxication Blamed In More Deaths, Injuries," <http://denver.cbslocal.com/2015/05/18/marijuana-intoxication- blamed-in-more-deaths-injuries/>, accessed May 19, 2015 4 Brian Maass, CBS4 Investigates, March 25, 2015, "Marijuana Edibles Blamed For Keystone Death," <http://denver.cbslocal.com/2015/03/25/marijuana-edibles-blamed- for-keystone-death/>, accessed March 26, 2015 SECTION 3: Adult Marijuana Use Page 172 419 of 669 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 3/September 2015 From Staff Reports, Tulsa World, March 26, 2015, "Mother of local man who committed suicide says marijuana candy in Colorado led to his death," <http://www.tulsaworld.com/news/local/mother-of-local-man-who-committed-suicide- says-marijuana-candy/article_5f34296b-7bec-5689-90b5-fd677d2dd8e5.html>, accessed March 26, 2015 6 National Families in Action & Partners, The Marijuana Report, May 27, 2015, The Marijuana Report.org/The Marijuana Report, accessed May 28, 2015 Mitchel Byars, Daily Camera, August 20, 2015, "Boulder coroner: Man's fall accidental; drugs may have been involved," <http://www. dailycamera.com/news/boulder/ci_28676915/boulder-coroner-mans-fall- accidental-drugs-may-have>, accessed August 21, 2015 8 Sophie Jane Evans, Dailymail.com, January 18, 2015, "Police called to comedian Ralphie May's Colorado show after 'he takes too much legal marijuana', forgets his act and causes uproar among the audience," <http://www/dailyrnail.co.us/news/>, accessed January 18, 2015 9 Smart Approaches to Marijuana (SAM), "Colorado Adult Marijuana Use Now Almost Double the National Average," press release, June 16, 2015 70 John Ingold, The Denver Post, December 26, 2014, "Marijuana use increased in Colorado, according to new federal survey", <http://www. denverpost. com/news/ci_27212493/marijuana-use-increased-colo r a do - according -new -federal -survey>, accessed December 26, 2014 " The Denver Post/Colorado Roundup, Tuesday, January 6, 2015"Yellowstone National Park - Colorado partly blamed as pot use up" 12 Woodruff Health Sciences Center, May 6, 2015, "Emory study shows increased adult marijuana use and binge drinking in states that legalize medical marijuana," <http://www.news.emory.edu/stories/2015/05/legalize_medical_marijuana_abuse/index. html>, accessed May 7, 2015 13 Jan -de Doward, The Guardian, April 22, 2015, "Cannabis smokers warned they risk poorer exam grades," <http://www.theguardian.com/society/2015/apr/11/cannabis- smokers-risk-poorer-grades-dutch-study-legalisation>, accessed April 11, 2015 SECTION 3: Adult Marijuana Use Page 173 420 of 669 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 3/September 2015 14 Quest Diagnostics webpage, <http://www.questdiagnostics. com/home/companies/employer/drug-screening/drugs- tested.html/>, accessed November 29, 2014 15 Institute for Behavior and Health, Inc., "Workplace Drug Testing in the Era of Legal Marijuana, March 2015" SECTION 3: Adult Marijuana Use Page 174 421 of 669 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 3/September 2015 SECTION 4: Emergency Room and Hospital Marijuana -Related Admissions Introduction The following section summarizes emergency room (ER) and hospital data related to marijuana in Colorado. The information, when available, compares the early medical marijuana era (2006 - 2008), the medical marijuana commercialization and expansion era (2009 - current) and the recreational marijuana era (2013 - current) in Colorado. • 2006 - 2008: There were between 1,000 and 4,800 medical marijuana cardholders and no known dispensaries operating in Colorado. • 2009 - Current: There were over 108,000 medical marijuana cardholders and 532 licensed dispensaries operating in Colorado by the end of 2012. See the introduction at the beginning of this report for more details on the commercialization and explosion of Colorado's medical marijuana trade. • 2013 - Current: In November 2012, Colorado voters passed Constitutional Amendment 64 which legalized marijuana for recreational purposes for anyone over 21 years of age. The amendment also allowed for licensed marijuana retail stores, cultivation operations and edibles manufacturing. Some Findings • Colorado emergency room visits per year related to marijuana: o 2013 -14,148 O 2014 -18,255 SECTION 4: Emergency Room and Hospital Marijuana -Related Admissions Page 175 422 of 669 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 3/September 2015 • In 2014, when retail marijuana businesses began operating, there was a 29 percent increase in the number of marijuana -related emergency room visits in only one year. • In 2014, when retail marijuana businesses began operating, the rate of emergency department visits likely related to marijuana increased 25 percent in just one year. • Emergency room visits related to marijuana per 100,000 in 2013: o Denver rate — 415.46 o Colorado rate — 248.32 ■ Denver's rate was 67 percent higher than Colorado's rate and increased 25 percent when recreational marijuana was legalized in 2013. • Hospitalizations related to marijuana: o 2011— 6,305 o 2012 — 6,715 o 2013 — 8,272 o 2014 —11,439 • In 2014, when retail marijuana businesses began operating, there was a 38 percent increase in the number of marijuana -related hospitalizations in only one year. • In 2014, when retail marijuana stores began operating, the rate of hospitalizations likely related to marijuana increased 20 percent in only one year. • Hospital discharges related to marijuana per 100,000 in 2013: o Denver rate — 245.94 o Colorado rate —148.80 ■ Denver's rate was over 65 percent higher than Colorado's rate and increased 29 percent when recreational marijuana was legalized in 2013. • In the three years after medical marijuana was commercialized, compared to the three years prior, there was a 46 percent increase in hospitalization related to marijuana. SECTION 4: Emergency Room and Hospital Marijuana -Related Admissions Page 176 423 of 669 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 3/September 2015 • Children's Hospital Colorado reported 2 marijuana ingestions among children under 12 years old in 2009 compared to 16 in 2014. Definitions Marijuana -Related: Also referred to as "marijuana mentions." This means the data could be obtained from lab tests, self -admitted or some other form of validation by the physician. That does not necessarily prove marijuana was the cause of the emergency admission or hospitalization. Data Number of Visits Marijuana -Related Emergency Room Visits 20,000 18,000 16,000 14,000 12,000 10,000 8,000 6,000 4,000 2,000 0 2011 2012 2013 2014 SOURCE: Colorado Hospital Association, Emergency Department Visit Dataset. Statistics prepared by the Health Statistics and Evaluation Branch, Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment NOTE: 2011 AND 2012 EMERGENCY DEPARTMENT DATA REFLECTS INCOMPLETE REPORTING STATEWIDE. INFERENCES CONCERNING TRENDS, INCLUDING 2011 AND 2012, SHOULD NOT BE MADE. 2014 FIGURES SHOULD BE ACCURATE, OR CLOSE TO ACCURATE, BUT HAVE NOT YET BEEN FINALLY CONFIRMED. SECTION 4: Emergency Room and Hospital Marijuana -Related Admissions Page 177 424 of 669 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Rates Per 100,000 600 500 400 300 200 100 Vol. 3/September 2015 Colorado Emergency Department Rates that are Likely Related to Marijuana* 2011 2012 2013 2014 554 *Rates of Emergency Department (ED) Visits with Possible Marijuana Exposures, Diagnoses, or Billing Codes in the First Three Diagnosis Codes per 100,000 ED Visits by Year in Colorado SOURCE: Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment, Monitoring Health Concerns Related to Marijuana in Colorado: 2014 NOTE: "POSSIBLE MARIJUANA EXPOSURES, DIAGNOSES, OR BILLING CODES IN THE FIRST THREE DIAGNOSIS CODES: THESE DATA WERE CHOSEN TO REPRESENT THE HD AND ED VISITS WHERE MARIJUANA USE WAS LIKELY A CAUSAL OR STRONG CONTRIBUTING FACTOR TO THE UNDERLYING REASON FOR THE HD AND ED VISIT. THESE DATA CONSISTED OF HD AND ED VISITS CODED WITH DISCHARGE CODES RELATED TO POISONING BY PSYCHODYSLEPTICS OR SEPARATE CODES RELATED TO CANNABIS ABUSE IN THE FIRST THREE DIAGNOSIS CODES WHICH ARE MORE LIKELY TO BE CLINICALLY SIGNIFICANT CODES." - COLORADO DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC HEALTH AND ENVIRONMENT, MONITORING HEALTH CONCERNS RELATED TO MARIJUANA IN COLORADO: 2014 NOTE: DATA NOT AVAILABLE PRE-2011. SECTION 4: Emergency Room and Hospital Marijuana -Related Admissions Page 178 425 of 669 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 3/September 2015 Colorado Emergency Department Rates that Could be Related to Marijuana* Rates Per 100,000 *Rates of Emergency Department (ED) Visits with Possible Marijuana Exposures, Diagnoses, or Billing Codes per SOURCE: Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment, Monitoring Health Concerns Related to Marijuana in Colorado: 2014 NOTE: "POSSIBLE MARIJUANA EXPOSURES, DIAGNOSES, OR BILLING CODES IN ANY OF LISTED DIAGNOSIS CODES: THESE DATA WERE CHOSEN TO REPRESENT THE HD AND ED VISITS WHERE MARITUANA COULD BE A CAUSAL, CONTRIBUTING, OR COEXISTING FACTOR NOTED BY THE PHYSICIAN DURING THE HD OR ED VISIT. FOR THESE DATA, MARIJUANA USE IS NOT NECESSARILY RELATED TO THE UNDERLYING REASON FOR THE HD OR ED VISIT. SOMETIMES THESE DATA ARE REFERRED TO AS HD OR ED VISITS WITH ANY MENTION OF MARIJUANA." - COLORADO DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC HEALTH AND ENVIRONMENT, MONITORING HEALTH CONCERNS RELATED TO MARIJUANA IN COLORADO: 2014 NOTE: DATA NOT AVAILABLE PRE-2011. SECTION 4: Emergency Room and Hospital Marijuana -Related Admissions Page 179 426 of 669 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 3/September 2015 Emergency Department Rates Per 100,000 Marijuana -Related, 2011-2013 Rates Per 100,000 ! Colorado 450.00 400.00 350.00 300.00 250.00 200.00 150.00 100.00 50.00 0.00 ! Denver City and County Legalization 1 2011 2012 2013 147.80 179.00 315.34 ! 331.22 248.32 415.46 SOURCE: Denver Office of Drug Strategy, The Denver Drug Strategy Commission, Proceedings of the Denver Epidemiology Work Group (DEWG), October 29, 2014 + The highest rates from 2011 to 2013 were among young adults (18 to 25 years). NOTE: 2011 AND 2012 EMERGENCY ROOM DATA DOES NOT REPRESENT COMPLETE, STATEWIDE PARTICIPATION. INCREASES OBSERVED OVER THESE THREE YEARS MAY BE DUE PARTLY, OR COMPLETELY, TO INCREASES IN REPORTING BY EMERGENCY ROOMS. SECTION 4: Emergency Room and Hospital Marijuana -Related Admissions Page 180 427 of 669 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact 12,000 c 10,000 0 IE 8,000 6, 0 4,000 5 z 2,000 Vol. 3/September 2015 Hospitalizations Related to Marijuana 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 SOURCE: Colorado Hospital Association, Hospital Discharge Dataset. Statistics prepared by the Health Statistics and Evaluation Branch, Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment Average Hospitalizations 10,000.00 9,000.00 8,000.00 7,000.00 6,000.00 5,000.00 4,000.00 3,000.00 2,000.00 1,000.00 0.00 Average Marijuana -Related Hospitalizations 2006-2008 2009-2012 Pre -Commercialization Post -Commercialization 2013-2014 Legalization SOURCE: Colorado Hospital Association, Hospital Discharge Dataset. Statistics prepared by the Health Statistics and Evaluation Branch, Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment SECTION 4: Emergency Room and Hospital Marijuana -Related Admissions Page 181 428 of 669 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 3/September 2015 600 500 © 400 a) 300 h 6� .wa 200 100 Colorado Hospitalization Rates that are Likely Related to Marijuana* 267 236 Commercialization 255 330 Legalization I524 340 438 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 "Rates of Hospitalization (HD) Visits with Possible Marijuana Exposures, Diagnoses, or Billing Codes in theFirst Three Diagnosis Codes per 100,000 HD Visits by Year in Colorado SOURCE: Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment, Monitoring Health Concerns Related to Marijuana in Colorado: 2014 NOTE: "POSSIBLE MARIJUANA EXPOSURES, DIAGNOSES, OR BILLING CODES IN THE FIRST THREE DIAGNOSIS CODES: THESE DATA WERE CHOSEN TO REPRESENT THE HD AND ED VISITS WHERE MARITUANA USE WAS LIKELY A CAUSAL OR STRONG CONTRIBUTING FACTOR TO THE UNDERLYING REASON FOR THE HD AND ED VISIT. THESE DATA CONSISTED OF HD AND ED VISITS CODED WITH DISCHARGE CODES RELATED TO POISONING BY PSYCHODYSLEPTICS OR SEPARATE CODES RELATED TO CANNABIS ABUSE IN THE FIRST THREE DIAGNOSIS CODES WHICH ARE MORE LIKELY TO BE CLINICALLY SIGNIFICANT CODES." - COL ORADO DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC HEALTH AND ENVIRONMENT, MONITORING HEALTH CONCERNS RELATED TO MARIJUANA IN COLORADO: 2014 SECTION 4: Emergency Room and Hospital Marijuana -Related Admissions Page 182 429 of 669 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 3/September 2015 2,500 2,000 0 0 0 0 1,500 1,000 500 Colorado Hospitalization Rates that Could be Related to Marijuana* Legalization 1,779 Commercialization Il 810 818 1,260 1,313 1,417 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 *Rates of Hospitalization (HD) Visits with Possible MarijuanaExposures,Diagnoses,or Billing Codes per 100,000 HD Visits by Year in Colorado SOURCE: Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment, Monitoring Health Concerns Related to Marijuana in Colorado: 2024 NOTE: "POSSIBLE MARIJUANA EXPOSURES, DIAGNOSES, OR BILLING CODES IN ANY OF LISTED DIAGNOSIS CODES: THESE DATA WERE CHOSEN TO REPRESENT THE HD AND ED VISITS WHERE MARIJUANA COULD BE A CAUSAL, CONTRIBUTING, OR COEXISTING FACTOR NOTED BY THE PHYSICIAN DURING THE HD OR ED VISIT. FOR THESE DATA, MARIJUANA USE IS NOT NECESSARILY RELATED TO THE UNDERLYING REASON FOR THE HD OR ED VISIT. SOMETIMES THESE DATA ARE REFERRED TO AS HD OR ED VISITS 'WITH ANY MENTION OF MARIJUANA." - COLORADO DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC HEALTH AND ENVIRONMENT; MONITORING HEALTH CONCERNS RELATED TO MARIJUANA IN COLORADO: 2014 SECTION 4: Emergency Room and Hospital Marijuana -Related Admissions Page 183 430 of 669 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 3/September 2015 Rates Per 100,000 Hospital Discharge Rates Per 100,000 Marijuana -Related, 2007-2013 300.00 250.00 200.00 150,00 100.00 Commercialization Lep_alization 1 20077 2008 1 2009 7 2010 J 2011 2012 1 2013 j —4--Denver City and County 129.90 1 146.76 I 154.81 1 201.20 1 189.08 190.51 1 245.94 1 -*--Colorado 77.15 87.50 89.88 i 114.18 17.48 1 123.65 148.80 SOURCE: Denver Office of Drug Strategy, The Denver Drug Strategy Commission, Proceedings of the Denver Epidemiology Work Group (DEWG), October 29, 2014 4. The highest rates from 2011 to 2013 were among young adults (18 to 25 years). NOTE: HOSPITAL DISCHARGE DATA REPRESENTS AN INDIVIDUAL'S INPATIENT STAY AT A HOSPITAL REQUIRING, AT MINIMUM, AN OVERNIGHT STAY AND IS IN REFERENCE TO WHEN THE PATIENT LEAVES THE HOSPITAL. A CODE IS ASSIGNED AS TO WHY THE PATIENT WAS IN THE HOSPITAL, CALLED THE ICD-9 CODE, WHICH IS USED FOR BOTH THE PATIENT'S MEDICAL RECORD AND FOR BILLING PURPOSES. SECTION 4: Emergency Room and Hospital Marijuana -Related Admissions Page 184 431 of 669 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 3/September 2015 Number of Children 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 Marijuana Ingestion Among Children Under 12 Years -of -Age 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 SOURCE: George Sam Wang, M.D. and Lalit Bajaj, M.D., Children's Hospital Colorado Cost 16 2014 Cost of Emergency Room: A study was conducted of a cross section of ER encounters from 2006 to 2008. The study found that "During our study period, the median charge for outpatient conditions in the emergency room was $1,233."' Related Material Cannabis -Related ED Visits Rise in States With Legalized Use: "Cannabis use and abuse have increased significantly during the past few years, especially in states where use of the substance is now legal, new research suggests." A study from the U.S. Healthcare Cost and Utilization Project show that emergency room visits coded for marijuana grew 50.4 percent between 2007 and 2012 in Colorado. This study was presented at the American Academy of Addiction Psychiatry (AAAP) 25th Annual meeting. "Everyone's talking about Colorado, but why aren't they also talking about the states with medical use of marijuana? There appears to be a flaw in the system," lead author Abhishek Rai, MD, from the Department of Psychiatry at St. Mary Mercy SECTION 4: Emergency Room and Hospital Marijuana -Related Admissions Page 185 432 of 669 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 3/September 2015 Hospital in Livonia, Michigan, told Medscape Medical News. "People with access to marijuana are using it and then coming to the ED," added Dr. Rai.' Places With More Marijuana Dispensaries Have More Marijuana -Related Hospitalizations: A press release on August 10, 2015 from the University of Pittsburgh Schools of the Health Sciences released a study to be published in the scientific journal Drug and Alcohol Dependence. The study revealed that, "People who live in areas of California with a higher density of marijuana dispensaries experience a greater number of hospitalizations involving marijuana abuse and dependence."' The Implications of Marijuana Legalization in Colorado: An article in the Journal of the American Medical Association by physicians from the Department of Emergency Medicine University of Colorado discusses the health implications of "marijuana policy liberalization." They write that, "Increased availability lead to increased health care utilization related to marijuana exposure. Exacerbation of chronic health conditions was expected. Tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) is associated with psychosis, anxiety, and depression symptoms, making exacerbation of underlying psychiatric disorders inevitable." The article further states, "However, there has been an increase in visits for pure marijuana intoxication. These were previously a rare occurrence, but even this increase is difficult to quantify. Patients may present to emergency departments (EDs) with anxiety, panic attacks, public intoxication, vomiting, or other nonspecific symptoms precipitated by marijuana use. The University of Colorado ED sees approximately 2000 patients per week; each week, an estimated 1 to 2 patients present solely for marijuana intoxication and another 10 to 15 for marijuana -associated illnesses."4 Five Students at a Denver Middle School Ingest Pot Edibles: A Denver middle school student had sprinkled marijuana on top of "rice crispy treats". Apparently five students ingested the marijuana, some of whom became ill. One of the students was rushed to the hospital at the request of her parents.5 3-Year-Old Rushed to Emergency A 3-year-old was taken to the emergency room after her father told the mother that the child was laying on the couch, seemed tired and not acting normally. At the hospital, the little girl vomited and was subsequently tested positive for marijuana. A search of the couple's residence found nearly 9 ounces of marijuana in a "plastic open top bin" and four marijuana plants growing. Officers also discovered suspected cocaine in the residence.' SECTION 4: Emergency Room and Hospital Marijuana -Related Admissions Page 186 433 of 669 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 3/September 2015 Burglar Taken to Hospital. Two juveniles were caught burglarizing a marijuana dispensary in Denver. One of the juveniles had to be taken to the hospital because he was so intoxicated.' Sources Caldwell N, Srebotnjak T, Wang T, Hsia R (2013 "How Much Will I get Charged for This?" Patient Charges for Top Ten Diagnoses in the Emergency Department, Plops ONE 8(2): e55491. Doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0055491, accessed January 2015 2 Deborah Brauser, Medscape Medical News from the American Academy of Addiction Psychiatry (AAAP) 25th Annual Meeting, December 16, 2014, "Cannabis - Related ED Visits Rise in States with Legalized Use", <http://www.medscape.com/viewarticle/836663>, XXWAAWS December 16, 2014 3 University of Pittsburgh, Schools of the Health Sciences Media Relations, press release, August 10, 2015, <http://www.upmc.com/media/NewsReleases/2015/Pages/mair-marijuana. aspx>, accessed August 10, 2015 4 Andrew A. Monte, MD; Richard D. Zane, MD; and Kennon J. Heard, MD, PhD, Department of Emergency Medicine, University of Colorado, Journal of the American Medical Association, December 8, 2014, "The Implications of Marijuana Legalization in Colorado," <http://jama.jamanetwork.com>, accessed December 9, 2014 5 Anthony Cotton, The Denver Post, May 7, 2015, "Denver police: Five students at Skinner Middle School ingest pot edibles; girl cited", <http://www.denverpost.com/news/ci_28070625/denver-police-investigating-reports- that-students-at-middle>, accessed May 7, 2015 6 Alan Gaithright, ABC 7 News Denver, December 17, 2014, "Denver toddler ingests marijuana; parents charged with child abuse, drug possession, DA says," <http://www.thedenverchannel.com/news/local-news/denver-toddler-ingests- marijuana-parents-charged-with-child-abuse-drug-possession-da-says>, accessed December 17, 2014 Noelle Phillips, The Denver Post, January 14, 2015, "Two juveniles busted breaking into Denver marijuana dispensary," <http://denverpost.com/news/ci_27320321/two- juveniles-busted-breaking-into-denver-marijuana-dispensary>, accessed January 24, 2015 SECTION 4: Emergency Room and Hospital Marijuana -Related Admissions Page 187 434 of 669 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 3/September 2015 THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK SECTION 5: Marijuana -Related Exposure Page 188 435 of 669 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 3/September 2015 SECTION 5: Marijuana -Related Exposure Introduction This section provides information primarily regarding Colorado marijuana -related self -reported calls to the Rocky Mountain Poison and Drug Center (RMPDC), Denver, Colorado. The data comparisons are from 2006 through 2013. The information compares the early medical marijuana era (2006 - 2008), the medical marijuana commercialization/expansion era (2009 - current) and the recreational marijuana era (2013 - current) in Colorado. • 2006 - 2008: There were between 1,000 and 4,800 medical marijuana cardholders and no known dispensaries operating in Colorado. • 2009 - Current: There were over 108,000 medical marijuana cardholders and 532 licensed dispensaries operating in Colorado by the end of 2012. See the introduction at the beginning of this report for more details on the commercialization and explosion of Colorado's medical marijuana trade. • 2013 - Current: In November 2012, Colorado voters passed Constitutional Amendment 64 which legalized marijuana for recreational purposes for anyone over 21 years of age. The amendment also allowed for licensed marijuana retail stores, cultivation operations and edibles manufacturing. Some Findings • In 2014, when retail marijuana businesses began operating, marijuana -only related exposures increased 72 percent in only one year. SECTION 5: Marijuana -Related Exposure Page 189 436 of 669 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 3/September 2015 • In the years medical marijuana was commercialized (2009 - 2012), marijuana - related exposures averaged a 42 percent increase from prior years (2001 - 2008) average. • All ages Colorado marijuana -related exposures: o During the years 2013 - 2014, the average number of all ages exposures was 175 per year. ■ Exposures for all ages doubled in Colorado after legalization. • Youth (ages 6 to 17 years old) marijuana -related exposures in Colorado: o During the years 2013 - 2014, the average number of children exposed was 45 per year. ■ This is an 80 percent increase from medical marijuana commercialization years (2009 - 2012) average which was a 67 percent higher increase over previous years (2006 - 2008) averages. • Young children (ages 0 to 5 years old) marijuana -related exposures in Colorado: o During the years 2013 - 2014, the average number of children exposed was 31 per year. ■ This is a 138 percent increase from the medical marijuana commercialization years (2009 - 2012) average which was a 225 percent increase from prior years (2006 - 2008). • Percent of total marijuana -related exposures involving children ages 0 to 5 years old: o During 2013 - 2014, a yearly average of 17.71 percent ■ This is about triple the national average of 5.95 percent SECTION 5: Marijuana -Related Exposure Page 190 437 of 669 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 3/September 2015 Data Average Nu mber 180 160 140 120 100 80 60 40 20 0 All Ages, Average Number of Marijuana -Related Exposures 2006-2008 2009-2012 Pre-Commerdalization Post-Commerdalization SOURCE: Rocky Mountain Poison and Drug Center 160 140 0 120 100 0 061 80 w 0 60 a) d E 40 0 z 20 0 2013-2014 Legalization Number of Exposures Reported for Marijuana Only 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 SOURCE: Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment, Monitoring Health Concerns Related to Marijuana in Colorado: 2014 via Rocky Mountain Poison and Drug Center SECTION 5: Marijuana -Related Exposure Page 191 438 of 669 l IL The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 3/September 2015 • 250 Qy 200 e 150 d ti 100 50 Number of Marij uana-Related Exposures, by Age Range 0-5yrs 6-12yrs 13-14yrs 15-17yrs 18-25yrs 26+ yrs Age Range SOURCE: Rocky Mountain Poison and Drug Center Average Number Youth Ages 6 to 17 Years Old, Average Number of Marij uana-Related Exposures 2006-2008 2009-2012 Pre -Commercialization Post -Commercialization SOURCE: Rocky Mountain Poison and Drug Center 2013-2014 Legalization ■ 2005-2009 1 2010-2014 SECTION 5: Marijuana —Related Exposure Page 192 439 of 669 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Average Number VoI.3/September 2015 Children Ages 0 to 5 Years Old, Average Number of Marijuana -Related Exposures 2006-2008 2009-2012 Pre -Commercialization Post- Commercialization SOURCE: Rocky Mountain Poison and Drug Center 35 E 30 °o, 25 c 20 15 G z 10 5 2013-2014 Legalization Marijuana -Related Exposures Children Ages 0 to 5 Years Old 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 SOURCE: Rocky Mountain Poison and Drug Center SECTION 5: Marijuana —Related Exposure Page 193 440 of 669 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 3/September 2015 18.00% 16.00% 14.00% • 12.00% c; 10.00% tOvec • 8.00% d 6.00% 4.00% 2.00% 0.00% Average Percent of All Marijuana -Related Exposures, Ages 0 to 5 Years Old 2009-2012 ■ National 1 Colorado SOURCE: Rocky Mountain Poison and Drug Center 2006-2008 Related Material 2013-2014 Pot -related Calls to Colorado, Washington Poison Centers Up: In a Denver Post article dated January 25, 2015 by Gene Johnson of the Associated Press, it cites the substantial increase in calls to poison control centers related to marijuana. "The spike in numbers since marijuana was legalized includes a troubling jump in cases involving young kids." Calls to the Colorado poison center in 2014 almost doubled the number of calls in 2013 and tripled the calls in 2012. Calls to the Washington poison center jumped about 50 percent from 2013 to 2014. Calls involving children nearly doubled in both states.' Child Marijuana Poisoning Incidents Increase After States Legalize Pot: A study by researchers at the Nationwide Childress Hospital report, "More young children are exposed to marijuana in states after the drug had become legal for medical or recreational use..." This study, in the journal Clinical Pediatrics found: "the rate of marijuana exposures among children 5 years old and under increased 16 percent each SECTION 5: Marijuana —Related Exposure Page 194 441 of 669 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 3/September 2015 year after legalization in those states." According to the National Poison Database System, child exposures increased 147 percent from 2006- 2013.2 Children and THC-Infused Edibles: According to a Colorado Springs Gazette Op/Ed dated June 21, 2015, entitled "THC extracts concentrate problems": "In Colorado, the number of exposures to THC-infused edibles in your children increased fourfold in one year, from 19 cases in 2013 to 95 in 2014, according to the Rocky Mountain Poison and Drug Center. "3 Sources Gene Johnson, the Associated Press/Denver Post, January 25, 2015, "Pot -related calls to Colo., Wash. poison centers up" 2 Jackie Borchardt, Northeast Ohio Media Group, June 16, 2015, "Child marijuana poisoning incidents increase after states legalize pot," <http://www. cleveland.com/open/index. ssf/2015/06/child_poisoning_cases_incre a s e. ht ml%23incart_river>, accessed June 17, 2015 3 Wayne Laugesen and Pula Davis, The Gazette editorial board, June 21 2015, "Clearing the Haze/THC extracts concentrate problems," <http://gazette.com/clearing- the-haze-thc-extracts-concentrate-problems/article/1554097>, accessed June 22, 2015 SECTION 5: Marijuana —Related Exposure Page 195 442 of 669 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 3/September 2015 THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK SECTION 5: Marijuana —Related Exposure Page 196 443 of 669 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 3/September 2015 SECTION 6: Treatment Introduction This section examines whether Colorado's legalized medical marijuana industry and the recent legalization of marijuana for recreational use has affected the admission rate to substance abuse treatment programs. The information compares the early medical marijuana era (2006 - 2008), the medical marijuana commercialization and expansion era (2009 - current) and the recreational marijuana era (2013 - current) in Colorado. • 2006 - 2008: There were between 1,000 and 4,800 medical marijuana cardholders and no known dispensaries operating in Colorado. • 2009 - Current: There were over 108,000 medical marijuana cardholders and 532 licensed dispensaries operating in Colorado by the end of 2012. See the introduction at the beginning of this report for more details on the commercialization and explosion of Colorado's medical marijuana trade. • 2013 - Current: In November 2012, Colorado voters passed Constitutional Amendment 64 which legalized marijuana for recreational purposes for anyone over 21 years of age. The amendment also allowed for licensed marijuana retail stores, cultivation operations and edibles manufacturing. Some Findings • Marijuana treatment data from Colorado in years 2005 - 2014 does not appear to demonstrate a definitive trend. Colorado averages approximately 6,500 treatment admissions annually for marijuana abuse. • Over the last ten years, the top three drugs involved in treatment admissions, in descending order, were alcohol (average 12,943), marijuana (average 6,491) and methamphetamine (average 5,044). SECTION 6: Treatment Page 197 444 of 669 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 3/September 2015 Data Number of Admissions 8,000 7,000 6,000 5,000 4,000 3,000 2,000 1,000 Treatment with Marijuana as Primary Substance of Abuse, All Ages 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 SOURCE: Center for Behavioral Health Statistics and Quality, Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration, Treatment Episode Data Set (TEDS) based on administrative data reported by states to TEDS through April 03, 2015 SECTION 6: Treatment Page 198 445 of 669 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 3/September 2015 Number of Admissions Drug Type for Treatment Admissions All Ages 16,000 14,000 12,000 10,000 8,000 6,000 4,000 I v 2005 , 2006 10,1681 11,721 2007 12008 12,094 113,385 2009 12010 13,8661 13,284 2011 13,414 2012 ' 2013 2014 tAlcohol 14,811 113,908 12,783 -IS-Marijuana 5,568 1 5,711 6,144 , 6,906 7,085 j 6,924 6,688 7,052 16,817 6,011 -0--Cocaine 2,936 13,485 3,464 13,691 3,036 i 2,519 2,375 2,283 i! 1,755 1,526 -W-Methampheta nine 5,087 ; 5,071 5,117 14,945 4,556 1 4,446 4,366 14,990 - 5,677 6,186 -II-Heroin 1,536 ! 1,380 1,353 j 1,499 1,730 ' 1,786 2,227 2,732 i 3,183 3,995 -0-Prescription 772 1 892 1,029 11,293 1,537 1,738 1,937 2,340 j 2,266 2,076 -+-.Other 329 '; 355 426 - 530 537 I 519 817 1 821 j 743 576 SOURCE: Colorado Department of Human Services, Office of Behavioral Health, 2005 - 2014 Percent of Admissions 30 20 Percent of Marijuana Treatment Admissions by Age Group 10 • a u 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 - 2011 2012 - 2013 __ 2014 31.2 28.2 28.3 28.7 29 27.7 24.1 22.4 19.8 -4-12-171 -II- 18-20 13 13.3 13 14 12.9 11.9 12.1 11.2 9.4 20 20.2 19.6 20.2 20.5 19.9 20.5 20.9 22.4 -a-21-25 35.8 38.3 39.1 37.1 37.6 40.5 43.3 45.6 48.4 -14-26+ SOURCE: Center for Behavioral Health Statistics and Quality, Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration, Treatment Episode Data Set (TEDS) based on administrative data reported by states to TEDS through April 3, 2015 SECTION 6: Treatment Page 199 446 of 669 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 3/September 2015 Number of Admissions 1,600 1,400 1,200 1,000 Marijuana Treatment Admissions Based on Criminal Justice Referrals 1,202 1,347 1,292 1,204 1,204 1,309 1,327 1,446 1,030 1,054 988 999 1,306 800 -4--Ages 17 i 821 805 826 and Under 791 --Ages 18-25 600 400 200 660 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 SOURCE: Colorado Department of Health Services, Office of Behavioral Health, 2005 — 2014 NOTE: DATA FROM THE COLORADO OFFICE OF BEHAVIORAL HEALTH IN YEARS 2011 THROUGH 2013 SHOWS THAT APPROXIMATELY 70 PERCENT OF MARIJUANA TREATMENT ADMISSIONS FOR THOSE OVER 18 YEARS OF AGE WERE REFERRALS FROM CRIMINAL JUSTICE AND 30 PERCENT WERE CLASSIFIED AS VOLUNTARY. 7 THIS IS LIKELY A CONTRIBUTING FACTOR FOR THE DROP IN ADMISSIONS FOR MARIJUANA ABUSE. "We have noticed that those presenting with Cannabis Use Disorder are more committed to their use and harder to get through to than in years past. Patients tell us regularly that they will give up other drugs/alcohol but not marijuana and remind us of its legal status. This logic would obviously hold no water with alcohol and is a disturbing trend given that patients telling us this are often in dire straits. Their use/addiction has had and is having extremely detrimental effects on their lives yet they tell us it can't be an issue because marijuana is "legal and non-addictive."2 Sources Colorado Department of Human Services, Office of Behavioral Health, 2005 — 2014 2 Clinical Director Michael Barnes, PhD, LMFT, Business Development/Community Liaison, CeDAR/University of Colorado Hospital, September 2015 SECTION 6: Treatment Page 1100 447 of 669 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 3/September 2015 SECTION 7: Diversion of Colorado Marijuana Introduction This section examines whether Colorado legalizing medical and recreational marijuana has established Colorado as a marijuana source state for other parts of the country. There is no mandatory process for law enforcement to report either the seizure or the source of the marijuana. Rocky Mountain High Intensity Drug Trafficking Area (RMHIDTA) contacted some law enforcement entities and requested voluntary reporting of those instances in which Colorado marijuana was seized in their jurisdiction. Only those cases that were completed and are a matter of public record were used in this report. Open or long-term major investigations involving marijuana trafficking from Colorado have been excluded. This section includes: • Interdictions resulting in seizure of marijuana from Colorado • Investigations resulting in seizure of marijuana from Colorado • Cases involving youth trafficking The information compares the early medical marijuana era (2006 — 2008), the medical marijuana commercialization and expansion era (2009 — current) and the recreational marijuana era (2013 — current) in Colorado. • 2006 — 2008: There were between 1,000 and 4,800 medical marijuana cardholders and no known dispensaries operating in Colorado. • 2009 — Current: There were over 108,000 medical marijuana cardholders and 532 licensed dispensaries operating in Colorado by the end of 2012. See the introduction at the beginning of this report for more details on the commercialization and explosion of Colorado's medical marijuana trade. SECTION 7: Diversion of Colorado Marijuana Page 1101 448 of 669 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 3/September 2015 • 2013 - Current: In November 2012, Colorado voters passed Constitutional Amendment 64 which legalized marijuana for recreational purposes for anyone over 21 years of age. The amendment also allowed for licensed marijuana retail stores, cultivation operations and edibles manufacturing. Definitions Colorado Marijuana Interdiction Seizures: Incidents where highway or state patrols stopped a driver for a traffic violation and subsequently found Colorado marijuana destined for other parts of the country. These interdiction seizures are reported on a voluntary basis to the National Seizure System (NSS) managed by the El Paso Intelligence Center (EPIC). These are random traffic stops, not investigations, and does not include local law enforcement data. Some Findings • During 2009 - 2012, when medical marijuana was commercialized, the yearly average number interdiction seizures of Colorado marijuana increased 365 percent from 52 to 242 per year. • During 2013 - 2014, when recreational marijuana was legalized, the yearly average interdiction seizures of Colorado marijuana increased another 34 percent from 242 to 324. • In 2014, there were 360 interdiction seizures of Colorado marijuana destined for other states. When compared to the pre -commercialization average of 52 from 2005 - 2008, this represents a 592 percent increase. • The total average number of pounds of Colorado marijuana seized from 2005 - 2008 compared to 2009 - 2014 increased 33 percent from 2,763 pounds to 3,671 pounds. • Of the 360 seizures in 2014, there were 36 different states destined to receive marijuana from Colorado. The most common destinations identified were Kansas, Missouri, Illinois, Oklahoma and Florida. SECTION 7: Diversion of Colorado Marijuana Page 1102 449 of 669 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 3/September 2015 • The top county identified as the source for the marijuana in 2014 was Denver with 63 percent. Data NOTE: THE BELOW CHARTS ONLY INCLUDE CASES WHERE COLORADO MARIJUANA WAS ACTUALLY SEIZED AND REPORTED. IT IS UNKNOWN HOW MANY COLORADO MARIJUANA LOADS WERE NOT DETECTED OR, IF SEIZED, WERE NOT REPORTED. ❖ A 2014 survey of approximately 100 interdiction experts estimates they seize 10 percent or less of what gets through undetected. Number of Seizures Colorado Marijuana Interdiction Seizures 400 -- - 350 300 250 200 150 100 50 4 0 Commerciali7atio 92 281 321 274 288 Legalization 360 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 SOURCE: El Paso Intelligence Center, National Seizure System, as of March 20, 2015 SECTION 7: Diversion of Colorado Marijuana Page 1103 450 of 669 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Average Number of Pounds 4,000 3,500 3,000 2,500 2,000 1,500 1,000 500 0 Vol. 3/September 2015 Average Pounds of Colorado Marijuana from Interdiction Seizures 2005-2008 Pre -Commercialization 2009-2014 Post -Commercialization SOURCE: El Paso Intelligence Center, National Seizure System, as of March 20, 2015 Rocky Mountain HIDTA expects the total weight of marijuana seized in the future will likely decrease due to: • More marijuana loads with high THC content and lower weight "buds" as opposed to lower THC content and higher weight bulk. • The increased popularity of hash and hash oil which are high THC, high price and low weight. • Smaller loads with less weight are easier to conceal and more difficult to detect. SECTION 7: Diversion of Colorado Marijuana Page 1104 451 of 669 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 3/September 2015 States to Which Colorado Marijuana Was Destined (2014) (Total Reported Incidents per State) No.t4tb1m 3 LAr aware, =- Ti�xav ?tot r Ok1ab n r Adaeays f 2 .T! �---�, Akxici� 1 9G 9 ?-'-"` ``� 2 15 Taue ,a IAWAO QsCrcf-J�luiao. SOURCE: El Paso Intelligence Center, National Seizure System, as of March 20, 2015 21 seizures with undisclosed destination states Top Three Cities for Marijuana Origin mantle ocem Originating City Rank Number of Seizures from Originating City Percentage 1. Denver 227 63.06% 2. Yuma 20 5.56% 3. Colorado Springs 14 3.89% A Few Examples of Interdictions Wyoming Highway Patrol Busy with Colorado Marijuana: The Wyoming Highway Patrol reported that, in the first quarter of 2015, 30 percent of their highway SECTION 7: Diversion of Colorado Marijuana Page 1105 452 of 669 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 3/September 2015 interdiction seizures involved people traveling to Colorado specifically for the purpose of purchasing and transporting marijuana and THC products to locations outside of Colorado. In one case in March, a highway patrol trooper stopped a vehicle for traffic violations. The officer subsequently found that the driver had failure -to -appear warrants for traffic offenses out of Wyoming and did not have a valid drivers' license. Subsequent to the arrest, officers found close to 5 ounces of high-grade marijuana. The driver told the officer that he had purchased the marijuana from a dispensary in the Steamboat Springs area of Colorado. Georgia Dealer Moves to Colorado for Marijuana Supply: On June 4, 2014, a Mississippi Highway Patrol trooper stopped a vehicle with Georgia plates for a traffic violation. As a result of the traffic stop, the trooper seized 5 pounds of marijuana from Denver, Colorado en route to Atlanta, Georgia. Apparently a Georgia resident moved to Denver so he could qualify for and use Colorado's legalization status to obtain and ship marijuana back to Georgia. The marijuana was referred to as "legal mile -high weed." Scottsbluff, Nebraska Resident Frequents Colorado Dispensaries: On December 20, 2014, a Scottsbluff (Nebraska) Police Department officer stopped a vehicle for a traffic violation. The vehicle was being driven by a female but the vehicle was registered to her boyfriend, both from Scottsbluff. Pursuant to the stop the officer found numerous items of marijuana literature from dispensaries in Denver and containers of marijuana bottles from dispensaries. The female told the officer that her boyfriend frequents marijuana dispensaries. The search further revealed numerous concealment locations in the vehicle. While the officer was conducting the search, the boyfriend arrived and advised the officer that anything found in the vehicle belonged to him. "Old Stuff" (Colorado Marijuana) to Mom's House: On December 17, 2014, a Shawnee County Sheriff's Office deputy stopped a rental vehicle registered in Missouri. The driver, from Denver, Colorado, was en route to Parkville, Missouri allegedly with boxes of "old stuff" to be taken to his mother's house. During this traffic stop the officer found THC butter, 3.9 pounds of high-grade marijuana in 17 different containers, labels from a Colorado dispensary as well as equipment and butane for setting up a marijuana extraction lab. Medical Marijuana Items from Colorado: On January 28, 2015, a South Dakota Highway Patrol officer stopped a vehicle registered in Minnesota for a traffic violation. During the search of the vehicle, the officer found 1 pound of marijuana, 1/2 pound of SECTION 7: Diversion of Colorado Marijuana Page 1106 453 of 669 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 3/September 2015 butane hash oil and 4 pounds of marijuana edibles. According to the officer, almost all of it was medical marijuana items from Colorado. Candy and Gummy Bears from Colorado to Florida: On September 8, 2014, Louisiana law enforcement stopped a rental vehicle for a traffic violation. The vehicle, traveling from Colorado to Tallahassee, Florida, was subsequently searched. The officer found approximately 10 pounds of high-grade marijuana and assorted marijuana edibles, including 3 bottles of sour gummy bears, "Monkey Bar", "Boulder Bar" and "Cookies and Cream." Marijuana Plants and Edibles: In March of 2015, a Kansas Highway Patrol trooper stopped a vehicle, registered in Wisconsin, for a traffic violation. Subsequent to the stop the trooper searched the vehicle and found 4 pounds of marijuana, 44 marijuana plants, 2 tubs of marijuana edibles and 3 marijuana candy bars in the vehicle. The vehicle was coming from Denver, Colorado en route to Wisconsin. Colorado Marijuana and Candy to Montana: On July 27, 2014, a Wyoming Highway Patrol trooper stopped a vehicle with Tennessee plates coming from Denver, Colorado en route to Montana. As a result of the traffic stop the trooper seized over 11 ounces of high-grade marijuana, 1 THC lollipop and 2 THC candies. The driver claimed he was going to Montana to fly fish although there was no fly fishing gear in the vehicle. Over 14 Pounds of Marijuana and Half a Pound of THC Wax: On March 14, 2015, a South Dakota Highway Patrol trooper stopped a vehicle registered in Minnesota for a traffic violation. A subsequent search revealed close to 15 pounds of marijuana and over half a pound of THC wax concealed in a suitcase and bag in the trunk of the vehicle. The vehicle was coming from Denver, Colorado en route to Rapid City, South Dakota. 120 Pounds and Edibles: In December of 2014, Kansas Highway Patrol troopers stopped a vehicle registered in Georgia for a traffic violation. Subsequent to the stop, the trooper discovered 120 pounds of marijuana and a half pound of marijuana edibles inside the vehicle. The vehicle was coming from Denver, Colorado en route to Missouri. Marijuana and Edibles Destined for Lincoln, Nebraska: On April 4, 2015, a Colorado State Patrol trooper stopped a rental vehicle for a traffic violation. During the stop, the trooper discovered 30 pounds of marijuana and 3,200 milligrams of marijuana SECTION 7: Diversion of Colorado Marijuana Page 1107 454 of 669 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 3/September 2015 edibles concealed in a suitcase and duffel bag in the trunk. The vehicle was headed to Lincoln, Nebraska from Denver, Colorado. U-Haul with Marijuana: In July of 2014, a Kansas Highway Patrol trooper stopped a vehicle towing a U-Haul trailer for traffic violations. During the traffic stop, the vehicle was searched and 67 pounds of marijuana, along with 17 pounds of marijuana edibles, were found inside the vehicle. The vehicle was coming from Denver, Colorado en route to Missouri. Colorado to Minnesota: On January 24, 2015, a South Dakota Highway Patrol trooper stopped a vehicle registered in Minnesota for a traffic violation. A subsequent search revealed 3 pounds of marijuana and 44 grams of THC wax as well as a loaded 9 mm handgun. This vehicle was coming from Fort Collins, Colorado en route to Minnesota. Colorado Marijuana to Virginia: On April 6, 2015, a Nebraska State Patrol trooper stopped a vehicle registered in Virginia for a traffic violation. A subsequent search revealed over 7 pounds of marijuana as well as marijuana edibles concealed inside a suitcase in the trunk of the vehicle and backpacks throughout the vehicle. The vehicle was coming from Colorado en route to Virginia. 168 Pounds Seized in South Carolina Two individuals from Colorado were arrested in Cherokee County, South Carolina after a traffic stop revealed approximately 168 pounds of marijuana. According to arresting officers, the marijuana was destined for Charlotte, North Carolina and worth approximately $900,000.1 Troopers Seize 33 Pounds of Pot: In November, 2014, Texas Department of Public Safety troopers seized 33 pounds of marijuana during a traffic stop. The two occupants of the vehicle who were arrested had just come from Colorado and were suspected of transporting the marijuana back to Ashville, North Carolina.2 34 Pounds Found in Pennsylvania Rental Vehicle: On January 11, 2015, a Nebraska State Patrol trooper stopped a vehicle for a traffic violation. This rental vehicle, registered out of Pennsylvania, was coming from Colorado en route to Mason City, Iowa. The trooper subsequently discovered 34 pounds of marijuana concealed inside two duffel bags in the trunk of the vehicle. 242 Pounds of Marijuana Seized: On April 11, 2014, a Nebraska State Patrol trooper stopped a vehicle for a traffic violation. A subsequent search revealed 242 SECTION 7: Diversion of Colorado Marijuana Page 1108 455 of 669 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 3/September 2015 pounds of marijuana found under the bed of the truck. The vehicle was coming from Denver, Colorado en route to Rochester, New York. 53 Pounds Destined for Wisconsin: On February 19, 2015, a South Dakota Highway Patrol trooper stopped a vehicle registered in Wisconsin. A subsequent search of the vehicle revealed 53 pounds of marijuana concealed in the trunk. This vehicle was coming from Colorado en route to Wisconsin. 10 Pounds Destined for Cedar Falls, Iowa: On October 20, 2014, an Iowa State Patrol trooper stopped a vehicle for a traffic violation. The trooper subsequently discovered 10 pounds of marijuana concealed inside two bags in the back seat of this pick-up truck. The driver came from Aurora, Colorado and was en route to Cedar Falls, Iowa. 5 Pounds Destined for College Town: On December 13, 2014, an Iowa State Patrol trooper stopped a vehicle for a traffic violation. The trooper subsequently discovered 5 pounds of marijuana concealed inside the inner lining of a suitcase that was located in the trunk of the vehicle. The vehicle was coming from Denver, CO en route to Ann Arbor, Michigan. New Jersey Rental Transporting Marijuana to Minnesota: On March 6, 2015, an Iowa State Patrol trooper stopped a vehicle for a traffic violation. A subsequent search revealed 6 pounds of marijuana concealed inside the spare tire area of the trunk of the vehicle. The rental vehicle, registered in New Jersey, was coming from Colorado en route to Twin Cities, Minnesota. Yuma, Colorado to Boston, Massachusetts: On March 8, 2014, an Ohio Highway Patrol trooper stopped a vehicle for traffic violations. During the stop, the trooper seized over 45 kilograms of marijuana. The vehicle was coming from Yuma, CO en route to Boston, Massachusetts. 55 Pounds to Columbia, Missouri: On October 25, 2014, Missouri Highway Patrol troopers pulled over a vehicle for traffic violations. During the stop, a subsequent search was conducted and the troopers discovered 55 pounds of marijuana. The vehicle, registered in Texas, was coming from Yuma, CO en route to Columbia, Missouri. SECTION 7: Diversion of Colorado Marijuana Page 1109 456 of 669 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 3/September 2015 Illinois Stops Marijuana Destined for Ohio: On October 23, 2014, Illinois State Police stopped a vehicle traveling from Denver, Colorado to Akron, Ohio. During the traffic stop officers, assisted by a K9, seized 8 pounds of high-grade marijuana vacuum - sealed and placed in two duffel bags in the trunk. 36 Pounds Destined for Florida: In January of 2015, a Kansas Highway Patrol trooper stopped a vehicle for traffic violations. Subsequent to the stop, the trooper discovered 36 pounds of high-grade marijuana inside the vehicle. This vehicle, registered in Florida, was coming from Denver, Colorado en route to Florida. Marijuana to Kentucky: In April of 2015, a Kansas Highway Patrol trooper stopped a vehicle with Texas registration for a traffic violation. A subsequent search of the vehicle revealed 24 pounds of marijuana concealed inside the vehicle. The vehicle was coming from Denver, Colorado en route to Kentucky. Marijuana to New Mexico: On September 4, 2014, a Colorado State Patrol trooper stopped a vehicle registered in New Mexico for a traffic violation. During the stop the trooper discovered 32 pounds of marijuana in a duffel bag in the trunk of the car. The vehicle was coming from Denver, Colorado en route to Roswell, New Mexico. 38 Pounds to Sioux Falls, South Dakota: On September 18, 2014, a Colorado State Patrol trooper stopped a vehicle for traffic violations. During the stop, the trooper discovered 38 pounds of marijuana in brand new luggage that was purchased in Denver specifically for the purpose of storing the marijuana in the trunk. The vehicle was coming from Denver en route to Sioux Falls, South Dakota. Trick or Treat Bag with Marijuana: On November 1, 2014, a Wyoming Highway Patrol trooper stopped a vehicle for speeding. When asked, the driver admitted she did not have registration for the vehicle and that she was coming from Colorado en route to Wamsutter, Wyoming. The trooper subsequently found eight plastic bags containing over 7 ounces of high-grade marijuana that were concealed in a plastic trick or treat bag. Colorado Marijuana to North Dakota: On December 5, 2014, a Colorado State Patrol trooper stopped a vehicle for a traffic violation. The vehicle was coming from Denver, Colorado en route to Grand Forks, North Dakota. During the stop, the trooper seized 15 pounds of marijuana wrapped in a vacuum -sealed container found in a suitcase and duffel bag in the trunk. SECTION 7: Diversion of Colorado Marijuana Page 1110 457 of 669 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact A Few Examples of Investigations Vol. 3/September 2015 NOTE: THE EXAMPLES BELOW ARE ONLY A SMALL SAMPLE OF THE MANY INVESTIGATIONS INVOLVING COLORADO MARIJUANA CITED BY VARIOUS DRUG UNITS. Colorado "Medical" Marijuana Sold in Springfield, Missouri: Based on a tip, Springfield (Missouri) P.D. officers secured a search warrant on the home of a drug dealer. Pursuant to the warrant, officers seized half a pound of marijuana, $2,000 in cash and nine weapons. Records show that one of the suspects had removed some of the contraband from the residence prior to police executing the warrant. They also seized items consistent with a THC extraction lab. Both suspects face charges of possession with intent to distribute a controlled substance. According to the news article: "A pair of Springfield men have been arrested and accused of collecting medical marijuana in Colorado and selling it in southwest Missouri."' Caregiver and 425 Pounds of Colorado Marijuana in Nashville: Two Breckenridge residents were arrested in a drug bust in Nashville, Tennessee where officers seized 425 pounds of marijuana, 4 pounds of hashish and $355,000 in cash. "Nashville police say Breckenridge's Christopher Steven Crumbliss, 39, and Tasha Desmond, 21, were part of a group traveling around the country illegally selling high- grade marijuana from Colorado." Crumbliss had a history of brushes with the law connected with marijuana cultivation and distribution activities but claimed to be a caregiver. In 2007 he and his wife, Tiffany, were charged in Larimer County (Colorado) with marijuana cultivation and possession with intent to distribute. They argued they were protected under the caregiver provision of Colorado medical marijuana law. Charges against Tiffany were dropped and Christopher Crumbliss plead guilty but was given probation in lieu of prison. A year later Larimer County Sheriff's Department and DEA served search warrants at the Crumbliss' three homes in Larimer County and Blue River, seizing more than 200 plants and 20 pounds of finished product. There were no criminal charges filed. Tiffany Crumbliss is the owner of Soul Shine Medical Consulting, a medical marijuana dispensary in Breckenridge. She categorically denies that the marijuana seized in Nashville came from her business.4 "Weak Enforcement" Leads to Colorado Marijuana Trafficking Organizations: In March 2015, Colorado law enforcement secured indictments against 32 people accused of being part of a multi -million dollar organization growing marijuana in Colorado for distribution out of state. This group, although growing illegally, had warehouses in areas populated by licensed commercial marijuana growers. The organization operated under the false pretense of being medical marijuana caregivers. "Their real goal, SECTION 7: Diversion of Colorado Marijuana Page 1111 458 of 669 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 3/September 2015 according to the indictment, was to use Colorado's laws and commercial marijuana industry to 'hide in plain sight."' "Organization members 'subjectively felt Colorado's weak regulatory enforcement structure afforded them the easiest opportunity to conduct illegal marijuana and distribution activity with little to no consequences from law enforcement and civil regulators,' the indictment states." Apparently most of the marijuana, estimated at 400 pounds monthly, was exported primarily to Minnesota. In fact, an individual with a skydiving business is accused of using company aircraft for marijuana shipments between Colorado and Minnesota or Texas. Apparently this individual was stopped in Kansas and found to be in possession of 66 pounds of marijuana and $330,000 in cash.5 Sex Trafficking and Drugs: "Denver has evolved into a breeding ground, officials say, for sex -traffickers who lure young runaways, often in exchange for drugs, into the underground business." "Tom Ravenelle with the FBI said he's seeing more print and online advertisements - chock-full of keywords like '4-20 friendly' - that attract young girls." "A former prostitute who said she traded sex for marijuana talked to CBS4 anonymously about her experience." Apparently she ran away when she was 17 and fell into prostitution, bartering sex for drugs and didn't leave until more than two decades. "I traded for marijuana because that was my vice," she said. "I needed to escape."' Legalization of Marijuana and Sex Tourism: • The legalization of marijuana is fueling a sex tourism industry in Colorado. • "Several victims were brought to Colorado specifically because of the availability of marijuana and the state being '420-friendly'."7 Outlaw Motorcycle Gang Affiliate Trafficking in Colorado Marijuana: In September 2014, Colorado law enforcement initiated an undercover operation involving the sale of large quantities of marijuana. A suspect sold an undercover agent 1 pound of marijuana for $2,300 and negotiated the sale of an additional 30 pounds of marijuana. Just prior to completing the sale, officers served a search warrant at the unregistered warehouse and the suspect's residence. Officers seized a sophisticated marijuana grow operation with 198 marijuana plants and approximately 31 pounds of marijuana. The entire investigation resulted in 2 arrests and the seizure of 1,600 marijuana plants, 36 pounds of processed marijuana, 22 firearms and over $100,000 in cash!. 1,100 Marijuana Plants in Lafayette, Colorado: David Melvin, 44, and Katie Melvin, 31, were arrested for growing 1,100 marijuana plants inside their home in Lafayette, Colorado. The two claimed the marijuana grow was legal, although the Colorado Department of Revenue "asserts that neither Kingsley [Katie Melvin's former SECTION 7: Diversion of Colorado Marijuana Page 1112 459 of 669 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 3/September 2015 business partner] nor the Melvins had any existing applications with the state, or with the city or county of Denver, with whom Katie told police she had applied."9 Pot Delivery Services Thriving in Colorado's Black Market: "Legalizing marijuana was supposed to largely eliminate the black market for pot, but a CBS4 Investigation found dealers have come off the street corner and onto the Internet, openly posing as legitimate delivery services. In just three hours, we contacted three delivery services and had marijuana products delivered all over Denver. The services claim to be perfectly legal because nothing was for sale. Instead of payment, buyers were expected to pay a pre -specified, cash 'donation'." In one case, a CBS4 employee appearing under age answered an ad for marijuana for a "$35 donation." When the marijuana delivery service arrived, the delivery man said that he had to get the money first and that he got the marijuana from a friend who was a grower for a dispensary. Another CBS4 employee responded to an ad for "Delicious Edibles for Donation." When ordering by text, the CBS4 employee asked if they were strong and the reply was, "Yes, will have a morbidly depressed person laughing on the floor." In the third case, the delivery driver claimed to be the chef who made the edibles and arrived with pre -packaged candies. Apparently they offered a full menu and the CBS4 employee ordered a $60 sampling but again there was no proof of age required. The delivery service offered to ship bulk orders. None of these delivery services would be interviewed on camera.10 Springfield Inundated by High-grade Marijuana from Colorado: Springfield, Missouri drug investigators are seeing an influx of high-grade marijuana, particularly from Colorado. A highway patrol sergeant says that the more potent marijuana has driven up the prices. In 2013, the Missouri State Highway Patrol seized 1,071 pounds of marijuana and approximately 1,700 pounds in 2014. So far in 2015, January through June, they seized more than 1,000 pounds. They also say that they have seen a huge increase in marijuana -infused food products.11 Medical Marijuana Scam Leads to Residence Turned Into Pot Farm: In June of 2015, a Colorado woman thought she was renting her home to a sweet couple from Florida who needed a place to live. What she didn't realize is this sweet couple was actually engaged in marijuana cultivation and trafficking. Apparently the couple turned the unfinished 2,800 sq. ft. basement into an elaborate marijuana cultivation facility. She said they had been cleaning up the mess for a week and that the tenants caused tens of thousands of dollars in damage. She said, "It absolutely makes me sick to my stomach." Apparently the tenant stated that his doctor had prescribed him 75 plants as well as his cousin and his cousin's wife. He claimed he was in compliance with the law. The lady who owned the home thought she was renting to a couple who SECTION 7: Diversion of Colorado Marijuana Page 1113 460 of 669 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 3/September 2015 were going to start a senior care service. Little did she know that the man had served 3- 1/2 years in prison for trafficking more than a ton of marijuana.72 Colorado Marijuana to Illinois and Georgia: In January 2015, Colorado law enforcement conducted an undercover operation into a marijuana trafficking organization shipping Colorado marijuana to Illinois and Georgia. The operation resulted in several undercover purchases of marijuana and a search warrant for the primary location. Pursuant to the search warrant, a 456 marijuana plant grow, a hash oil lab and 28 weapons were seized.'3 Yellowstone Sees Rise in Marijuana Cases: "An increasing number of visitors to Yellowstone National Park are being prosecuted for possession small amounts of medical and recreational pot, which remains illegal on federal land." Park rangers attribute this increasing trend to ignorance of federal law and the growing prevalence of legal marijuana, including neighboring Colorado. In 2010, there were only 21 marijuana cases in Yellowstone which more than doubled in 2013 and quadrupled in 2014 as of December 17, 2014. There were 52 cases in 2013 and, as of December 17, 2014, 80 cases handled by the U.S. Attorney's Office in October 2013. An artist from Hawaii was pulled over for speeding and park rangers subsequently found 3 grams of marijuana which he admitted to purchasing in Colorado.14 Oklahoman Busted with 85 Pounds of Colorado Marijuana: In December 2014, two days after Oklahoma officials filed a lawsuit against the state of Colorado, a Tulsa subject was arrested with 85 pounds of marijuana and $20,000 in cash. Apparently the man and a mother -daughter team from Broken Arrow, Oklahoma were taking the marijuana to Tulsa. Officers found receipts showing that the three had gone to Colorado where they had purchased the marijuana.15 Undercover Operation in Boulder: On May 9, 2014 Boulder Police Department arrested six adults and one juvenile after a month -long undercover investigation. Apparently this group was responsible for distributing marijuana and psychedelic mushrooms to juveniles and adults in and around the Central Park area. The involved officers believe the marijuana was purchased from a local medical marijuana dispensary.16 Forged Marijuana Business Licenses: Anna Cozy, 36, was charged with forging marijuana business licenses. "The charges allege that Cozy was running a marijuana business in Denver and provided phony business licenses to inspectors."17 SECTION 7: Diversion of Colorado Marijuana Page 1114 461 of 669 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol.. 3/September 2015 Colorado Marijuana -Infused Candy in Maryland: Prince Georges County (Maryland) police seized several boxes of candy that were infused with marijuana. The boxes were destined for Laurel, Maryland coming from Colorado and the West Coast. The candy included taffy, mint chocolate bars, blueberry chocolate bars and banana - walnut chocolate bars. The police put out a warning to parents to be aware of such products saying they are easily confused with real candy.18 State Shuts Down Pot Shops: The Department of Revenue has around 55 fulltirne employees to keep "a closer eye" on over 2,000 marijuana businesses. However, in 2014 55 medical marijuana businesses closed compared to 35 during the 3 previous years combined. Some of the reasons for the closures include a dispensary with 4,000 ounces of marijuana beyond their per -patient limit, neglecting to implement required inventory tracking, failing to provide evidence that at least 70 percent of their stock was self - grown, insufficient internal cultivation and other violations of regulations. "In October, the Herbal Center in Denver was closed for a laundry list of infractions, including having more than 200 pounds of excess marijuana on its medical side, evidence of consumption on the premises, operating before obtaining a local license, inventory tracking errors and insufficient security." In Carbondale (Colorado) in 2011 the owner of Mother Earth Dispensary was arrested on charges of selling marijuana to unlicensed buyers and selling cocaine to undercover law enforcement officers.19 Craigslist Pot Sellers: Three men were arrested for selling 4-1/4 pounds of marijuana for $10,000. An undercover officer found a posting for an online marketplace for marijuana and made a contact. He made arrangements for the undercover purchase, meeting two of the individuals at one location and driving to another which was a licensed marijuana retailer. It was there they met another individual who was an employee of the retail marijuana operation who had a backpack full of marijuana. This individual "had been buying thousands of dollars' worth of marijuana from his employer, according to the [Denver Police Department's] Facebook post."20 2,630 Marijuana Plants in an Outdoor Grow on Public Land: On October 1, 2014 federal and local law enforcement seized an outdoor marijuana cultivation site with 2,630 marijuana plants on White River National Forest land. This grow operation was well tended by the growers. It had black piping supplying water to the grow operation from a stream that was dammed up to collect the water. Officers reported tents, food, shovels, tarps, weed spreader and other items for the grow operation, including piles of trash throughout the grow site.21 SECTION 7: Diversion of Colorado Marijuana Page 1115 462 of 669 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 3/September 2015 A Few Examples of Diversion Involving Youth Teacher Accused of Providing Pot to Students: A high school teacher in Thornton, Colorado was fired for allegedly providing marijuana to students. "One parent told FOX31 Denver, 'My daughter is a senior at Pinnacle and she said that kids have been buying edibles as well as regular marijuana from her."'22 Teen Shot During Hash Oil Deal: A man, with a female teenager, made arrangements over Facebook to buy "marijuana wax" (hash oil). When they met to consummate the transaction, one of the suspects got out of the vehicle and robbed the man at gunpoint. The man then drove after the suspect's vehicle from which a shot was fired, hitting the 16-year-old teenager and a dog that was in the man's vehicle 23 Mother Provided Marijuana to Son Who jumped From Window: The mother of a 19-year-old teenager was arrested for providing a marijuana edible brownie to her son. On April 14, 2015, the young man consumed one dose of edible marijuana brownie and started acting strangely. According to witnesses, he ran toward the living room window and jumped three stories to the ground. A neighbor reports that he heard the window shatter when the young man jumped and found him lying bloodied on the ground. Reports indicate he was covered in glass and blood but was confused when he ran up to him to ask for help. According to a neighbor, the young man didn't realize he had jumped from a window.24 Mom Supplies Marijuana Edibles: In February 2015, a 14-year-old was taken by ambulance to a hospital after eating homemade marijuana -infused candy. The student obtained the candy from a fellow student who brought it to school after his mom had made it at home. The mother, who claims to be a consultant for marijuana manufacturing, stated that the candy did not contain any marijuana. Apparently the Colorado Bureau of Investigation disagreed as analysis of the candy revealed it did contain marijuana. The mother will be charged with contributing to the delinquency of a minor.25 Girl Eats Father's Marijuana -Laced Bar: A young Wisconsin girl ate a THC-laced chocolate bar that was purchased in Colorado and brought back to Wisconsin. The girl said she found the bar in the dresser drawer of her father's bedroom. When school officers were alerted, the young girl's pulse was so weak that the officers were unable to read it. When officers served a search warrant at the girl's residence, they found infused marijuana labeled as being medicinal THC. The officers also seized hash oil, a concentrated form of THC.26 SECTION 7: Diversion of Colorado Marijuana Page 1116 463 of 669 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 3/September 2015 Some Examples from School Resource Officers27 Middle School Drug Organization: "On an incident three students, one -sixth, seventh and eighth graders, were involved in sale, transport and exchange of marijuana. One of the students was the salesman the other would transport the weed and last student would collect the money. All the students were reported by the buyer. All received a citation." Medical Marijuana "Patient" Sells at High School: "19 years of age non -student leaves medical marijuana dispensary and drives straight to my high school. The non - student was able to blend in inside the school and was attempting to sell his medical marijuana to students in the lunch room. He went to jail. Approximately three ounces of marijuana was recovered from his car in the parking lot." Mom is Source: "In February 2015, a high school student was contacted on campus with marijuana and marijuana edibles that she was given by her mother who legally obtained them recreationally." Dispensary Marijuana: "More than 50% of confiscated marijuana was in dispensary containers." Grow Operation "Discards": "Students are retrieving discards from a grow operation to re -sell as true product. Charged with felony distribution." 13-Year-Old Dealer: "In February 2014, a 13 year old was dealing marijuana to two other students after stealing marijuana from his father's medical supply." 10-Year-Old Dealer: "A ten year old boy selling marijuana to other ten year olds on school grounds. Boy got the drugs from parents stuff." Lock and Key: 10th grade student takes approximately three ounces of medical marijuana from parents inventory and brings it to school where he was attempting to sell it to other students. Parents were adamant that he couldn't have got it from their supply as they have the only key to gain access to it. They were wrong." SECTION 7: Diversion of Colorado Marijuana Page { 117 464 of 669 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 3/September 2015 Some Examples from School Counselors28 Dealing Pot at School: • "Last spring we had a 10th grade student who sold marijuana to another student in the men's faculty bathroom." • "October, 2014. 7th grade students reported another 7th grader trying to sell marijuana at school. He was searched and the substance was found. Got it from dad's supply." • "A seventh grade student was caught selling edibles to classmates in the hallway. The student was suspended. An 8th grade student was caught carrying a knife and an empty container of marijuana in his backpack. He was also suspended. Ironically, he was one of the students. Who was caught buying the brownies from the 7th grade student." Comments Nebraska Sheriff Speaks Out Against Marijuana Source: Adam Hayward, the sheriff of Deuel County, Nebraska, which is right by the state line with Colorado, says he has "arrested all sorts of people carrying marijuana back from Colorado along Interstate 76: teenagers making weekend runs to Denver and once a 67 year old grandmother." In reference to a 75 pound seizure of marijuana, he stated that the pot came from a marijuana growing facility in Colorado.29 Sidney, Nebraska Chief of Police Rolls Eyes at Colorado Ads: The Chief of Police of Sidney, Nebraska felt that the radio ads by the Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment telling people not to take marijuana out of the state were a joke. He says, "Do you really think that somebody listening to that is going to say, 'Oh, they said on the radio I shouldn't take my marijuana back into Nebraska. So because they said it on the radio and I got a warning, I'm gonna listen to it'? Nah." Since Colorado has had retail stores, police in rural counties that border Colorado are reporting big increases in illegal marijuana trafficking. The chief says they have seen a 50 percent increase during that time.3° Black Market is Thriving in Colorado: Colorado Attorney General Cynthia Coffman, in referencing the marijuana black market, stated "Don't buy that," she told the room (fellow state attorneys general at a professional conference in February). "The criminals are still selling on the black market. ...We have plenty of cartel activity in Colorado (and) plenty of illegal activity that has not decreased at all."31 SECTION 7: Diversion of Colorado Marijuana Page 1118 465 of 669 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 3/September 2015 Oklahoma Sheriff's Deputy Reference Colorado Marijuana: "We're running into more people with marijuana out of Colorado - just a regular, old traffic stop," said Dillon March, a sheriff's deputy in Custer County, Oklahoma who regularly patrols Interstate 40, a major east -west freeway stretching across the country. "They'll drive to Colorado, they'll pick it (marijuana) up, and they'll drive back to where they're from, whether that be Oklahoma, Texas, Missouri or Arkansas."32 Sources Carla Field, WYFF4.com, January 13, 2015, "Traffic stop yields more than $900K worth of pot," <http://www.wyff4.com/news/Traffic-stop-yields-more-than-900K- worth-of-pot/30682306>, accessed January 13, 2015 2 JC Cortez, Amarillo Glove-News/Amarillo.com, November 21, 2014, "Troopers seize 33 pounds of pot," <http://amarillo.com/news/local-news/2014-11-21/troopers-seize-33- pounds-pot>, accessed November 21, 2014 3 Harrison Keegan, Springfield News -Leader, December 8, 2014, "Police say men collected medical pot in Colorado and sold it in Springfield", <http://www.news- leader. com/story/news/local/ozarks/2014/12/08/police-say-men-collected-medical-pot- colorado-sold-springfield/20100513/>, accessed December 10, 2014 4 Ben Trollinger, Summit Daily, December 1, 2014, "Two Breckenridge residents charged in Nashville marijuana bust netting 425 lbs. of pot", <http://www.summitdaily.com/news/14058026-113/marijuana-crumbliss-chase-county>, accessed December 1, 2014 5 John Ingold, The Denver Post, March 25, 2015, "32 indicted in massive Colorado marijuana trafficking investigation", <http://www. denverpost. com/news/ci_27783732/32-indicted-massive-colorado- marijuana-trafficking-investigation>, accessed June 23, 2015 6 CBS4 News/Denver, September 1, 2014, "Sex -Trafficking Lures Increasing In Denver, Officials Say," <http://denver.cbslocal.com/2014/09/01/sex-trafficking-lures- increasing-in-denver-officials-say/>, accessed April 15, 2015 ' Colorado Springs Police Department, "2014 Year -End Human Trafficking Demographic Report," February 3, 2015 SECTION 7: Diversion of Colorado Marijuana Page 1119 466 of 669 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 3/September 2015 8 Rocky Mountain High Intensity Drug Trafficking Area, 2015 9 Alex Burness, Daily Camera, January 31, 2015, "1,100 marijuana plants uncovered at alleged illegal grow in Lafayette," <http://www.dailycamera.com/top- stories/ci_27436704/1-100-marijuana-plants-uncovered-at-alleged-illegal>, accessed February 1, 2015 70 Denver (CBS4), "Pot Delivery Services Thriving In Colorado's Black Market," May 6, 2015, <http://denver.cbslocal.com/2015/05/06/pot-delivery-services-thriving-in- colorados-black-market/>, accessed May 7, 2015 11 KCTV 5 News, Kansas City, "Springfield inundated by high-grade marijuana from Colorado, June 29, 2015, <http://www.kctv5.com/story/29430277/springfield-inundated- by-high-grade-marijuana-from-colorado>, information from Springfield News -Leader, <http://www.news-leader.com>, accessed June 30, 2015 12 Brandon Rittiman, KUSA-Channel 9 News, June 8, 2015, "Renters turn house into pot farm," <http://www.9news.com/story/news/local/2015/06/08/renters-turn-house- into-pot-farm/28713457/>, accessed June 9, 2015 13 Rocky Mountain High Intensity Drug Trafficking Area op cit 14 Ben Neary, Associated Press, January 4, 2015, "Yellowstone sees rise in marijuana cases," <http://www.tri-cityherald.com/2015/01/04/3341300_yellowstone-sees-rise-in- marijuana.html?sp=/99/900/1154/&rh=1#storylink=cpy>, accessed January 4, 2015 15 KOCO-TV (Oklahoma City), December 24, 2014, "Police say Tulsa man busted with Colorado pot," <http://www.koco.com/news/Police-say-Tulsa-man-busted-with- Colorado-pot/30389266>, accessed December 24, 2014 16 Mitchell Byars of the Daily Camera, The Denver Post, Saturday, May 10, 2014, page 16A NEWS section, "Seven arrested in drug bust by Boulder police" 77 Anthony Cotton, The Denver Post, December 17, 2014, "Woman charged with forging marijuana business licenses", <http://www.denverpost.com/news/ci_27156731/woman-charged-forging-marijuana- business-licenses>, accessed December 17, 2014 SECTION 7: Diversion of Colorado Marijuana Page 1120 467 of 669 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 3/September 2015 18 Associated Press, The Washington Times, October 31, 2014, "Maryland police seize marijuana -infused candy," <http://www.washingtontimes. com/news/2014/oct/31 /maryland-police-seize-marijuana- laced-candy/>, accessed November 1, 2014 191 Will Grandbois, Glenwood Springs Post Independent, December 9, 2014, "State closes dozens of med pot shops in '14", <http://www.aspentimes.com/news/14170766- 113/marijuana-medical-recreational-state>, accessed December 9, 2014 20 Noelle Phillips, The Denver Post/Denver and The West Section, Sunday, May 10, 2015, "Denver police say three men tried to sell pot using Craigslist," <http://www. denverpost. corn/news/ci_28079525/denver-police-say-three-men-tried-sell- pot>, accessed May 10, 2015 21 Two Rivers Drug Enforcement Team, e-mail June 16, 2014 "MJ Grow in Pitkin County" 22 Justin Joseph, KDVR-TV/Fox 31 Denver, February 12, 2015, "Teacher at Pinnacle Charter High School fired, accused of providing pot to students," <http://kdvr. com/2015/02/12/te acher-at-pinnacle-charter-high-school-fired-accused-of- providing-pot-to-students/>, accessed February 13, 2015. 23 Robert Garrison, 9News-KUSA, March 18, 2015, "Teen shot during hash oil deal outside Aurora Target," <http://www.9news.com/story/news/local/2015/03/17/teen-dog- shot-in-robbery-at-aurora-target/24942985/>, accessed May 7, 2015 24 CBS4Denver, April 23, 2015, "Mom Arrested For Allegedly Giving Edibles To Son Who Jumped From 3rd Story," <http://denver.cbslocal.com/2015/04/23/mom-arrested- pot-edibles-teen-jumped-third-story/>, accessed May 6, 2015 25 E-mail from Sergeant Jim Gerhardt, Thornton Police Department, "Marijuana Incident", April 1, 2015 26 Brenna Linsley, The Chippewa Herald/Associated Press, August 31, 2014, "Girl eats father's marijuana -laced bar", <http://chippewa.com/news/local/complaint-girl-eats- father-s-marijuana-laced-bar/article_da742ff8-a4e8-57eb-b408-5272d0055d2f.html>, accessed August 31, 2014 27 Colorado Association of School Resource Officers written survey, Rocky Mountain HIDTA, 2015 SECTION 7: Diversion of Colorado Marijuana Page 1121 468 of 669 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 3/September 2015 2s School Counselor survey by Rocky Mountain HIDTA 29 Alison Stewart, PBS Newshour (transcript), February 14, 2015, "Between a rock and cannabis: How neighboring states struggle when pot becomes legal," <http://www.pbs.org/newshour/bb/rock-cannabis-neighboring-states-struggle-pot- becomes-legal/>, accessed February 14, 2015 3° Kirk Siegler, National Public Radio, February 3, 2015, "Nebraska Says Colorado Pot Isn't Staying Across The Border," <http://www.npr.org/2015/02/03/382646498/nebraska-says-colorado-pot-isnt-staying-on- its-side-of-the-border>, accessed February 4, 2015 31 The Gazette, March 23, 2015, "Special report, 'Clearing the Haze:' Black market is thriving in Colorado," <http://gazette.com/black-market-is-thriving-in- colorado/artide/1548305>, accessed March 24, 2015 32 The Gazette, March 23, 2015, "Special report, 'Clearing the Haze:' Black market is thriving in Colorado," <http://gazette.com/black-market-is-thriving-in- colorado/article/1548305>, accessed March 24, 2015 33 School Counselor survey by Rocky Mountain HIDTA SECTION 7: Diversion of Colorado Marijuana Page 1122 469 of 669 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 3/September 2015 SEC710N 8: Diversion by Parcel Introduction This section examines whether Colorado's legalized medical marijuana industry and the recent legalization of marijuana for recreational use has established Colorado as a source state for marijuana for other parts of the country. The use of parcel packages as a drug transportation method has gained popularity with drug traffickers. The available information compares the years 2009 through 2013 considered the medical marijuana commercialization/expansion era (2009 - current) and the recreational marijuana era (2013 - current) in Colorado. • 2006 - 2008: There were between 1,000 and 4,800 medical marijuana cardholders and no known dispensaries operating in Colorado. • 2009 - Current: There were over 108,000 medical marijuana cardholders and 532 licensed dispensaries operating in Colorado by the end of 2012. See the introduction at the beginning of this report for more details on the commercialization and explosion of Colorado's medical marijuana trade. • 2013 - Current: In November 2012, Colorado voters passed Constitutional Amendment 64 which legalized marijuana for recreational purposes for anyone over 21 years of age. The amendment also allowed for licensed marijuana retail stores, cultivation operations and edibles manufacturing. Some Findings • From 2010 - 2014, the number of intercepted U.S. mail packages of marijuana from Colorado, has increased 2,033 percent from 15 to 320. • In just one year, from 2013 to 2014 when retail marijuana businesses began operating, there was a 55 percent increase in Colorado marijuana packages seized in the mail. SECTION 8: Diversion of Colorado Marijuana by Parcel Page 1123 470 of 669 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 3/September 2015 • From 2010 - 2014, the total pounds of marijuana seized from U.S. packages mailed from Colorado has increased 722 percent from 57 to 470 pounds. • Between 2010 and 2014, the number of states destined to receive marijuana mailed from Colorado has increased each year from 10 to 38. • From 2006 - 2008, compared to 2013 - 2014, the average number of parcels containing Colorado marijuana seized that were destined outside the United States increased over 7,750 percent and the pounds of marijuana seized in those parcels increased over 1,079 percent. Data NOTE: THESE FIGURES ONLY REFLECT PACKAGES SEIZED; THEY DO NOT INCLUDE PACKAGES OF COLORADO MARIJUANA THAT WERE MAILED AND REACHED THE INTENDED DESTINATION. INTERDICTION EXPERTS BELIEVE THE PACKAGES SEIZED WERE JUST THE "TIP OF THE ICEBERG." 350 300 250 200 150 100 Parcels Containing Marijuana Mailed from Colorado to Another State 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 SOURCE: United States Postal Inspection Service, Prohibited Mailing of Narcotics, as of January 21, 2015 SECTION 8: Diversion of Colorado Marijuana by Parcel Page 1124 471 of 669 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact 600 500 h a 400 ., W 0 300 E 200 100 Vol, 3/September 2015 Pounds of Colorado Marijuana Seized by the U.S. Postal Inspection Service Le alization 57.20 68.20 0 gillIIIII 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 SOURCE: United States Postal Inspection Service, Prohibited Mailing of Narcotics, as of January 21, 2015 Number of Different States Number of States Destined to Receive Marijuana Mailed from Colorado 2009 2010 Legalization 2011 2012 2013 SOURCE: United States Postal Inspection Service - Prohibited Mailing of Narcotics 38 2014 SECTION 8: Diversion of Colorado Marijuana by Parcel Page 1125 472 of 669 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 3/September 2015 NOTE: INFORMATION ON THIS PAGE (PG. 126) WAS REMOVED AS IT WAS DISCOVERED TO BE INACCURATE INFORMATION RELATED TO SOME COLORADO PARCELS OF MARIJUANA BEING SENT OUTSIDE THE UNITED STATES. REMAINDER OF THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK SECTION 8: Diversion of Colorado Marijuana by Parcel Page 1126 473 of 669 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 3/September 2015 NOTE: INFORMATION ON THIS PAGE (PG. 127) WAS REMOVED AS IT WAS DISCOVERED TO BE INACCURATE INFORMATION RELATED TO SOME COLORADO PARCELS OF MARIJUANA BEING SENT OUTSIDE THE UNITED STATES. A Few Parcel Examples ❖ There are courier delivery service companies, with locations throughout the country, from which Colorado marijuana destined for other states have been seized. Unlike the U.S. Postal Service, a central data repository does not exist for these various private couriers. Bad Luck in Marijuana Industry Leads to Arrest: In April 2015, a major parcel company alerted Chicago Police to a package coming from Colorado that had a strong odor of marijuana. Police obtained a search warrant and seized nearly 7 pounds of marijuana. The individual to whom the package was delivered was arrested. This individual was identified as part of the young entrepreneurs who went to Colorado about five years prior to make money in the medical marijuana industry. Apparently he moved to Colorado and grew marijuana plants in a warehouse outside of Denver. At the same time, his wife operated a small medical marijuana dispensary in Denver. Prior to this arrest in 2015, he was arrested in 2010 by Chicago Police for a parcel post package containing 40 pounds of marijuana. The individual reflected on his hard luck in the medical marijuana business and stated, "Some people in the industry have gotten lucky. Other guys like me have gotten caught in the system."' REMAINDER OF THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK SECTION 8: Diversion of Colorado Marijuana by Parcel Page 1127 474 of 669 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 3/September 2015 North Metro Task Force Busy with Parcel Cases: North Metro Task Force responded to 142 packages containing marijuana from just one parcel company. They have had additional cases with two other major parcel companies.' Medical Marijuana Store Owner to Receive $16,000: In February 2015, three suspicious parcels were identified. A search warrant was obtained and revealed the packages contained over $16,000 in cash. These three parcels, all coming from different locations including Idaho, Pennsylvania and Illinois, were destined for a Colorado Springs metro area medical marijuana store owner.' Colorado Marijuana Selfie: In February 2015, a Texas man was arrested for trying to send himself marijuana and marijuana products he purchased in Pueblo, Colorado. Apparently the subject purchased the marijuana in Pueblo and then mailed it to himself in San Angelo, Texas where he resides. The package, when seized, contained 9 pounds of "high-grade marijuana" and marijuana edibles as well as cough syrups, skin patches and "wax" that had been "legally purchased" from two separate dispensaries in Pueblo. This individual was arrested in Texas.3 Breck Man Gets Pot Christmas Presents at New York Hotel": In December, 2014, a 28-year-old Breckenridge, Colorado resident was taken into custody for possession of over 16 pounds of marijuana. Apparently he used the U.S. Postal Service to ship the marijuana, wrapped as Christmas presents, to himself in New York.4 It's Illegal to Ship Marijuana Out of State?: In October 2013, North Metro Task Force investigated a package containing 10.2 pounds of marijuana and 3.4 pounds of edibles being shipped to Florida. They were able to identify the individual, a former resident of Florida, who was sending packages to relatives living in Florida. He claimed he didn't realize it was illegal to ship marijuana and edibles.' Castle Rock Man Mails Pot: An individual in Castle Rock, Colorado plead guilty to sending more than 100 packages of marijuana to "locations across the country and receiving several hundred thousand dollars through the mail in return." The U.S. Attorney's Office in Colorado reports that searches of the subject's apartment and vehicle turned up approximately 24 pounds of marijuana, marijuana extract and marijuana edibles. The authorities also seized $53,000 in cash.' SECTION 8: Diversion of Colorado Marijuana by Parcel Page 1128 475 of 669 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 3/September 2015 Colorado Marijuana to Broward County, Florida: In 2014, there were nine separate parcels received in Broward County, Florida that were marijuana originating from Colorado. The total weight was 30.17 pounds with one package as small as 4 grams and another as large as 17 pounds. There was hash oil and marijuana candy seized in two of the packages. Four of the packages were sent from Denver, two from Aurora, one from Lakewood, one from Colorado Springs and one from Golden.' 25 Parcels Seized Going to 13 States: In 2014, one parcel facility seized 25 packages containing marijuana from Colorado with a total weight of 123 pounds. They were able to identify that nine of the packages came directly from Denver, three from Littleton, two from Aurora, two from Breckenridge and the rest were sent from six other cities in Colorado.' Brownies to Florida: In March 2015, the West Metro Task Force responded to a parcel company that opened a suspicious package and found two baggies with marijuana brownies, along with a business card. The card read "Sweet Mary Jane — Merciful Chocolate." The package was destined for Sulphur Springs, Florida.' Regular Customer: In January 2014, a suspicious parcel was located which subsequently lead to a search warrant revealing 1.2 pounds of marijuana. Law enforcement was able to identify the sender who was shipping the marijuana from Colorado to Maryland. The individual was a frequent customer at this parcel location.' Colorado Marijuana to Northern Florida: In Northern Florida, 15 marijuana and/or hashish parcels from Colorado had been sent to Florida weighing a total of 40.5 pounds. All the marijuana was hydroponic and destined for Florida with the exception of one 5.7 pound package that was destined for Georgia.' Highway Traffic Stop Results in Package Interception: In July 2014, two subjects traveling from Aurora, Colorado to Des Moines, Iowa were stopped on Interstate 76 in Colorado for a traffic violation. During the stop, a receipt from a major parcel company was discovered. The package on the receipt was subsequently intercepted and 3.5 pounds of marijuana was seized.' Colorado to Arkansas: In April 2014, a parcel company turned over a package containing 5.4 ounces of marijuana to TRIDENT. Apparently the package, coming from Garfield County, Colorado, was en route to Jonesboro, Arkansas.' Regular Packages from Colorado to South Dakota: In July 2014, North Metro Task Force investigated a package containing 3.2 pounds of marijuana being shipped from SECTION 8: Diversion of Colorado Marijuana by Parcel Page 1129 476 of 669 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 3/September 2015 Colorado to Rapid City, South Dakota. The follow-up investigation with the South Dakota authorities resulted in the suspect confessing to have received packages from Colorado on a regular basis.2 Stuffed Animals with Marijuana: In June 2015, Loveland Police Department was called out on a suspicious package from a parcel company. They discovered that the package contained stuffed animals full of marijuana and weighing over 2 ounces. The package was coming from Colorado en route to Navarre, Florida.2 Hash to Florida: In January 2015, a customer acting very suspicious attempted to ship a parcel from the Colorado Springs area to Florida. This individual subsequently gave consent to open the parcel, which contained approximately 5 ounces of hash.2 5 Pounds to Houston, Texas: In May 2015, West Metro Task Force investigators were called by a parcel company who had discovered five 1-pound packages of marijuana destined to be shipped to Houston, Texas.2 Helping a Friend: In September 2014, West Metro Task Force investigators responded when a 29-year-old male attempted to send an overnight package containing miscellaneous food items and marijuana concentrate. When arrested, the individual told the investigators he was attempting to "help" a friend who lived in Hawaii.2 Halloween Candy from Colorado: In October 2014, law enforcement in the Metropolitan Washington, DC area seized three parcels containing approximately 7.2 pounds of THC-laced Halloween candy. These parcels originated from Colorado and were set to be delivered to an address in Maryland.2 Colorado Marijuana to Mississippi: In 2014, there were six packages with marijuana from Colorado being sent to Mississippi via parcels. The total weight of the six parcels was 9.7 pounds.2 Sources 1 CBS2 Local/Chicago, April 6, 2015, "Man Busted Again For Colorado -To -Chicago UPS Marijuana Shipment," <http://chicago.cbslocal.com/2015/04/06/man-busted-again- for-Colorado-to-chicago-ups-marijuana-shipment/>, accessed April 6, 2015 SECTION 8: Diversion of Colorado Marijuana by Parcel Page 1130 477 of 669 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 3/September 2015 2 Rocky Mountain High Intensity Drug Trafficking Area, 2015 3 Jesse Paul, The Denver Post/Denver and the West Section, February 5, 2015, "Pueblo police: Texas man arrested after trying to send $63,000 of marijuana," <http://www. denverpost. corn/news/ci_27465615/pueblo-police-texas-man-arrested- after-trying-send?source=infinite>, accessed February 5, 2015 4 Allison Sylte, 9News.com, December 17, 2014, "Breck man gets pot Christmas presents at NY hotel," <http://www.9news.com/story/news/crime/2014/12/17/david- malchow-marijuana-christmas-present/20548229/>, accessed December 18, 2014 5 The Denver Post/Colorado Roundup Section, May 13, 2015 "Castle Rock Man pleads guilty to mailing marijuana." SECTION 8: Diversion of Colorado Marijuana by Parcel Page 1131 478 of 669 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 3/September 2015 THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK SECTION 8: Diversion of Colorado Marijuana by Parcel Page 1132 479 of 669 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 3/September 2015 SECTION 9: THC Extraction Labs Introduction Since the de facto and actual legalization of marijuana, many new trends have developed. The emergence of the THC extraction lab, commonly referred to as a butane hash oil (BHO) lab, is a prime example. The major draw to marijuana extraction is the potency of the final product. Some marijuana concentrates can contain 80-90 percent THC, whereas an average size marijuana cigarette averages 10-15 percent THC. Marijuana users state that vaporizing even a small amount of marijuana concentrate produces a more euphoric high than smoking. There are several solvents that can be used during the extraction process, including acetone, butane, carbon dioxide (CO2), hexane and rubbing alcohol. However, butane hash oil extraction has become an increasingly popular method of producing marijuana concentrate. The process involves forcing butane through an extraction tube filled with finely -ground marijuana. The residue that emerges from the other end is a mixture of highly -concentrated THC and butane. Once the butane has completely evaporated, the final product is a viscous liquid known as "dab," "wax,", "shatter", or "earwax," to name a few. This product does not emit the characteristic odor of traditional marijuana. Butane is a very volatile and explosive solvent. Flash fire explosions have originated from the butane used in the extraction process. Several elements can spark a deadly explosion, such as static electricity, open flame from a cigarette lighter, or a simple electric switch. This process has sent several individuals to the hospital for burn treatments and the numbers continue to rise. This section examines the trends in both extraction lab explosions and the resulting injuries. The information in this section covers the medical marijuana commercialization and expansion era (2009 - current) and the recreational marijuana era (2013 - current) in Colorado. SECTION 9: THC Extraction Labs Page 1133 480 of 669 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 3/September 2015 Some Findings • From 2013 — 2014 there was a 167 percent increase in reported Colorado THC extraction lab explosions from 12 to 32. • From 2013 — 2014, there was a 67 percent increase of injuries related to Colorado THC extraction lab explosions from 18 to 30. • Top three cities where a THC extraction lab explosion occurred in Colorado in 2014: o Denver=7 o Grand Junction = 4 o Colorado Springs = 3 • In 2014, 94 percent of all explosions occurred in a residential setting. • As of September 9, 2015, there have only been 7 THC extraction lab explosions reported. Data THC Extraction Lab Explosions 2009 2010 2011 2012 SOURCE: Rocky Mountain HIDTA, Investigative Support Center 2013 2014 SECTION 9: THC Extraction Labs Page 1134 481 of 669 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 3/September 2015 Number of Injuries 35 30 25 THC Extraction Lab Explosion Injuries 10 Legalization 20 mrnercialization 15 10 5 0 18 3 0 0 0 AMP' ANSI 2009 2010 2011 2012 SOURCE: Rocky Mountain HIDTA, Investigative Support Center Number of Burn Victims 2013 2014 University of Colorado Hospital THC Extraction Lab Self -Admitted Burn Victims 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 2011 2012 2013 SOURCE: University Hospital Burn Unit — University of Colorado Hospital 2014 SECTION 9: THC Extraction Labs Page 1135 482 of 669 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 3/September 2015 ❖ Some of the injuries from the extraction process include, but are not limited to, severe burns to the hands, arms and face. The University Hospital Burn Unit - University of Colorado Hospital reports several cases in which skin grafts were required to repair the injuries.1 It should be noted that based on the first seven months of reported THC extraction lab explosions in 2015, there appears to be a significant decline from the previous two years. This is largely due to the publicity generated by the police, fire, healthcare and media in 2014 regarding the dangers of THC extraction labs. As of September 9, 2015, only seven lab explosions have been reported to Rocky Mountain HIDTA and only four lab -related injuries reported to the Burn Center. Sources 1 Camy Boyle, MS, RN, CCRN, CCNS, associate nurse manager, University Hospital Burn Unit - University of Colorado Hospital, personal interview, March 2014 Rocky Mountain HIDTA compiled the data provided by local, fire and police departments. SECTION 9: THC Extraction Labs Page 1136 483 of 669 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 3/September 2015 SECTION 10: Related Data Topics • Crime • Revenue • Homeless • Suicides • Environmental Impact • THC Potency • Marijuana Use and Alcohol Consumption • Medical Marijuana Registry • Licensed Marijuana Businesses as of January 2015 • Business Comparisons as of January 2015 • Demand and Market Size • 2014 Reported Sales of Marijuana in Colorado • 2014 Price of Marijuana • Local Response to the Medical and Recreational Marijuana Industry in Colorado • Polling • Lawsuits • Other Issues Crime Denver Crime: Some proponents from the marijuana industry claim that, since marijuana retail stores began on January 1, 2014, the crime rate in Denver has decreased. Actually, reported crime in Denver increased 10 percent during that time period. SECTION 10: Related Data Page 1137 484 of 669 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Nu mber of Crimes 180,000 160,000 140,000 120,000 100,000 80,000 60,000 40,000 20,000 Colorado Crime Vol. 3/September 2015 v 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 ■ Property Crimes 158,064 158,213 159,536 159,397 164,973 167,802 165,483 ■ Violent Crimes 16,062 16,608 16,676 16,278 15,719 16,056 16,355 SOURCE: Colorado Bureau of Investigation, http://crimeinco.cbi.state.co.us/ All 2013 2014 55,115 reported crimes 60,788 reported crimes 5,391 reported crimes increase from 2013 to 2014 (10 percent increase) • Crimes against persons increased 15.1 percent • Crimes against property decreased 3 percent • Crimes against society increased 23 percent • All other offenses increased 41 percent SOURCE: National Incident Based Reporting System definitions in the City and County of Denver, September 11, 2015 SECTION 10: Related Data Page 1138 485 of 669 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact 2014 2013 2012 2011 2010 2009 0 City and County of Denver Crime • Property Crimes ■ Violent Crimes 5,000 10,000 15,000 20,000 Number of Crimes Vol. 3/September 2015 25,000 30,000 35,000 SOURCE: City and County of Denver, Denver Police Department, Crime Statistics and Maps, September 10, 2015 Number of Incidents Total Marijuana -Related Crime for Denver City and County 300 250 200 150 100 50 2012 2013 SOURCE: City and County of Denver Open Source Data Catalog, July 2015 2014 NOTE: "DATA ARE CRIMES REPORTED TO THE DENVER. POLICE DEPARTMENT WHICH, UPON REVIEW, WERE DETERMINED TO HAVE CLEAR CONNECTIONS OR RELATION TO MARIJUANA. THESE DATA DO NOT INCLUDE POLICE REPORTS FOR VIOLATIONS RESTRICTING THE POSSESSION, SALE, AND/OR CULTIVATION OF MARIJUANA." - OPEN DATA CATALOG, MARIJUANA CRIME, DATA.DENVERGOV.ORG SECTION 10: Related Data Page 1139 486 of 669 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 3/September 2015 Marijuana -Related Crime for Denver City and County 180 160 y 140 • 120 100 1:: z 40 20 0 2012 2013 2014 SOURCE: City and County of Denver Open Source Data Catalog, July 2015 ■ Non -Industry • Industry ❖ The majority of marijuana -related crime was the burglary of licensed marijuana businesses. NOTE: "DATA ARE CRIMES REPORTED TO THE DENVER POLICE DEPARTMENT WHICH, UPON REVIEW, WERE DETERMINED TO HAVE CLEAR CONNECTIONS OR RELATION TO MARIJUANA. THESE DATA DO NOT INCLUDE POLICE REPORTS FOR VIOLATIONS RESTRICTING THE POSSESSION, SALE, AND/OR CULTIVATION OF MARIJUANA." - OPEN DATA CATALOG, MARIJUANA CRIME, DATA.DENVERGOV.ORG SECTION 10: Related Data Page 1140 487 of 669 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 3/September 2015 Number of Arrests/Citations 800 700 600 500 400 300 200 100 0 Denver Police Department Unlawful Public Display/Consumption of Marijuana 2012 2013 2014 SOURCE: Denver Police Department, Traffic Operations Bureau via Vice/Drug Bureau Number of Citations Boulder Police Department Marijuana Public Consumption Citations 140 120 100 80 60 40 20 0 2013 2014 SOURCE: Boulder Police Department, Records and Information Services NOTE: THE CITY OF BOULDER DID NOT HAVE A MUNICIPAL STATUTE SPECIFIC TO PUBLIC CONSUMPTION OF MARIJUANA UNTIL MID-2013. "City Leaders in Vail recently banned recreational marijuana stores, sighting (sic) the increase in crime and panhandling in other mountain towns that do allow sales, as a major factor their ban."' SECTION 10: Related Data Page 1141 488 of 669 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 3/September 2015 Revenue Question: How much revenue will the recreational marijuana industry generate in Colorado? Will the income exceed the cost related to the impact of legalization in Colorado? Answer: No one knows for sure. It will take years of data collection to complete an analysis of whether marijuana legalization is economically positive or an economic disaster. Total Revenue from Marijuana Taxes, Calendar Year 2014 60,000,000 50,000, 000 40,000, 000 w C 30,000,000 20,000,000 10,000,000 0 2.9% Regular Sales 10% Special Sales 15% Excise Total 2014 Taxes ■ Retail Marijuana Taxes ■ Medical Marijuana Taxes SOURCE: Colorado Department of Revenue, Monthly Marijuana Taxes, Licenses and Fees Transfers and Distribution NOTE: FIGURES DO NOT INCLUDE ANY CITY TAXES: THE STATE DOES NOT ASSESS OR COLLECT THOSE TAXES. SECTION 10: Related Data Page 1142 489 of 669 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 3/September 2015 Colorado's Total General Fund Revenue, FY 2015* t Marijuana Tax Revenue (Medical and Recreational) = 0.7% *Preliminary Numbers based on June 2015 Forecast SOURCE: Colorado Office of State Planning and Budgeting, June 2015 Forecast (eleven months of data) Total marijuana tax revenue (medical and recreational) for FY2015 comprises 7/10 of 1 percent (0.7%) of Colorado's total general fund revenue. SECTION 10: Related Data Page 1143 490 of 669 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 3/September 2015 Some Costs Related to Marijuana Revenue for the State of Colorado FY2015/162 $13,000,728 $314,633 $3,292,643 $271,328 $190,097 $436,766 $1,168,000 $320,388 $2,150,000 $212,369 $21,806,952 $6,600,000 $29,900,000 Department of Revenue (includes the Marijuana Enforcement Division) Department of Agriculture Department of Public Health and Environment (primarily medical marijuana) Department of Public Safety Governor's Office of Marijuana Coordination Department of Law Department of Law (Peace Officer Standards and Training) Department of Public Health and Environment Department of Public Health and Environment (Marijuana public education campaign) Department of Local Affairs TOTAL Estimate distributed to local government (FY 2014/15) Estimate collected for school construction (18 months, January, 2014 - June, 2015) NOTE: THESE ARE BUDGETED AMOUNTS AND MAY NOT REPRESENT ACTUAL SPENDING. DOES NOT INCLUDE COSTS TO LOCAL GOVERNMENT NOR ANY COSTS ASSOCIATED WITH SOCIETAL IMPACTS SUCH AS TRAFFIC DEATHS AND EMERGENCY ROOM ADMISSIONS. Articles Colorado Weed Czar: Revenue Up in Smoke: According to Andrew Freedman, director of the Colorado Governor's Office of Marijuana Coordination, most revenue generated from legal marijuana sales will be used to regulate the industry. "Freedman, who is tasked with keeping tabs on the regulation of Colorado's retail and medical marijuana markets, said the tax dollars brought in largely go toward the 'cost of legalization."' He said, "You do not legalize for taxation. It is a myth. You are not SECTION 10: Related Data Page 1144 491 of 669 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 3/September 2015 going to pave streets. You are not going to be able to pay teachers. The big red herring is the whole thing that the tax revenue will solve a bunch of crises. But it won't."3 Tax Revenue Doesn't Measure Up: In February 2015, state officials released tax revenue figures from recreational and medical marijuana for 2014 at around $63 million. "The 15 percent excise tax dedicated for schools - projected alone to raise $40 million - has generated about one-third of the original estimates. Excise taxes totaled $13.3 million from Jan. 1 through Dec. 31 according to data from the Colorado Department of Revenue." Colorado's governor had to drastically modify his $100 million plan for tax revenue. "We ended up with much closer to a $33.5 million budget for this fiscal year," said Andrew Freedman, director of the Governor's Office of Marijuana Coordination. Freedman said the first priority is to cover costs of regulation. Apparently about $7.6 million is needed to enforce regulations and $5.6 million for a statewide public education campaign.4 "Marijuana Taxes Won't Save State Budgets": Colorado Governor John Hickenlooper's office projected $118 million in taxes from recreational marijuana and modified that projection down to $69 million. The Colorado Department of Revenue commissioned report estimated 130 metric tons of marijuana would be consumed in Colorado, but just 77 metric tons were sold through medical or recreational retailers. The rest was sold through an unregulated and untaxed gray market and the black market.5 The False Promise of Marijuana Money in Education: This article cites a 2014 survey in which more than half the respondents said that the positive to legalization was tax revenue as the greatest benefit. The article goes on to point out that, of the $40 million earmarked for schools, excise taxes have brought in about half of that.6 SECTION 10: Related Data Page 1145 492 of 669 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 3/September 2015 Homeless Number of Beds Provided 100,000 90,000 80,000 70,000 60,000 50,000 40,000 30,000 20,000 10,000 0 Total Overnight Beds Provided, January Through June 2013 2014 SOURCE: The Salvation Army, Intermountain Division Related Material 2015 Denver Shelters Cite Legal Pot in Homeless Upswing:7 There are no records on how many homeless people came to Colorado because of "legal weed." However, homeless centers are seeing an influx, straining their ability to meet the need. • Director Brett Van Sickle of Denver's Salvation Army Crossroads Shelter: "The older ones are coming for medical (marijuana), the younger ones are coming just because it's legal." An informal survey of around 500 new out- of-towners found as many as 30 percent relocated for pot. • Executive Director Tom Luehrs of Denver's Saint Francis Center has seen a big increase in new faces at the shelter and an increase of 50 people a day more in 2014 than 2013. He says many have said they were drawn to Colorado because of legal marijuana. • Urban Peak, which provides services to those ages 15 to 25, saw a 152 percent increase at their drop -in center in just one year. Director Kim Easton said about one-third of the newcomers cite legal marijuana as a factor in moving to Colorado. SECTION 10: Related Data Page 1146 493 of 669 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 3/September 2015 Legal Pot Blamed for Influx of Homeless:8 • Deputy Director Kendall Rames of Urban Peak said, "Of the new kids we're seeing, the majority are saying they're here because of the weed." • Director Melinda Paterson, of Father Woody's Haven of Hope, said, "Typically, they have an attitude. But we are really strict here." She said that normally in the summer Father Woody's gets an increase of 50 people per month but this year more than 300 a month. • The Salvation Army Denver shelter averages went from 225 men to about 300 per night. They are seeing a much larger number of 18 to 25-year-olds. An informal survey suggested about 25 percent of the increase was related to marijuana. • St. Francis Center Executive Director Tom Luehrs says marijuana only trails looking for work among a list of reasons for coming to Colorado. Legalized Recreational Marijuana Use Draws Homeless Texans to Colorado: An article about homelessness and marijuana, published on September 22, 2014 states, "Colorado is seeing a significant increase in the number of homeless people arriving from Texas and the head of two homeless shelters said a big reason for the increase is homeless people wanting to smoke pot." One homeless female from Texas is quoted as saying, "It wasn't the only reason but it was one of the main factors." Another individual from Lubbock, Texas who went to Denver, Colorado says he meets homeless Texans every day that went to Colorado to smoke marijuana. Murray Flagg, of the Salvation Army, said, "We were averaging 190 people a night. Now we are averaging 345 people a night." He goes on to state, "We find about one in four people have come for some marijuana related issue."9 Homeless, Marijuana and Crime: Larimer County (Colorado) Sheriff Justin Smith has noted that, since marijuana was legalized, his agency is experiencing a significant spike in the homeless, transient and sheltered (HTS) population. HTS accounts for approximately 25 percent of county jail inmates. Many of those admit they came to Colorado because marijuana was legalized. The 121 homeless, transient and sheltered inmates generally have not been arrested for petty crime. In reviewing booking charges, it appears only 20 percent could be considered minor crime. Most were arrested for multiple crimes such as:10 • 28 percent — some kind of assault charge • 26 percent — harassment or felony menacing charge • 22 percent — some kind of theft, from burglary to auto theft charge • 13 percent — resisting arrest charge SECTION 10: Related Data Page 1147 494 of 669 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Suicide Data Vol. 3/September 2015 NOTE: ON AVERAGE, BETWEEN 2006 — 2013, 95 PERCENT OF ALL SUICIDES HAD TOXICOLOGY RESULTS OF WHICH 8 PERCENT WERE POSITIVE FOR MARIJUANA.36 Substance Type Average Toxicology of Suicides Among Adolescents Ages 10 to 19 Years Old, 2009-2013 Marijuana Alcohol Opiaid Antidepressent Amphetamine Cocaine 0.0% 6.0% 8.0% 10.0% 12.0% 14.0% 16.0% 18.0% PercentPositive SOURCE: Colorado Violent Death Reporting System, Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment (CDPHE) SECTION 10: Related Data Page 1148 495 of 669 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Percent of caseswith toxicology available 35.0% 30.0% 25.0% 20.0% 15.0% 10.0% 5.0% 0.0% Cocaine Vol. 3/September 2015 Average Toxicology Results by Age Group Colorado, 2009-2013 Amphetamine Marijuana Antidepressent Opioid Substance Type Alcohol ■ Ages 20+ ■ Ages 10-19 SOURCE: Colorado Violent Death Reporting System, Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment (CDPHE) ❖ Marijuana is the only substance where youth ages 10 to 19 years old have a higher percent than adults ages 20 and older. Environmental Impact Pesticides on "Legal" Marijuana Grows: Denver city officials quarantined marijuana plants at eleven legal grow facilities in May of 2015. This quarantine is based on hundreds of millions of dollars' worth of marijuana believed to be contaminated with pesticides." Water -Intensive Marijuana Cultivation: An article concerning marijuana cultivation in California, published in the journal Bioscience, revealed that marijuana is an extremely thirsty plant. "In the state's north coast region, about 22 liters of water or more per plant per day is used during the growing season, which lasts from June through October." A co-author pointed out that marijuana grown in the state of California uses nearly twice as much water as wine grapes.12 Side Effects of Legal Marijuana: "Damaged homes have become an epidemic nightmare for the realtors who manage rental properties, who have been left explaining SECTION 10: Related Data Page 1149 496 of 669 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 3/September 2015 to homeowners why black mold has infested their income properties, why their sheetrock has been pulled out and makeshift watering systems installed. Every realtor seems to have a horror story about renting to seemingly fine tenants who are actually quick -profit -making pot entrepreneurs. No insurance company will cover damages from a grow establishment because it is still federally illegal."73 Marijuana Stink Means Property Values Sink: Apparently neighbors in Pitkin County (Colorado) are infuriated by the stench that comes from a marijuana greenhouse.14 Marijuana Electric Demands: "Surging electricity consumption by Colorado's booming marijuana industry is sabotaging Denver's push to use less energy - just as the White House perfects a Clean Power Plan to curb carbon pollution." Apparently Denver's electricity rate is increasing at a rate of 1.2 percent per year and 45 percent of the increase comes from marijuana growing facilities. The growing facilities used 86 million kWh in 2012, 121 million in 2013 and 200 million in 2014.15 Pot Growers and Sky -High Power Bills: "The average indoor grow operation in Denver has a monthly electric bill of $20,000 to $50,000," said Jay Czarkowski, a principal at Canna Advisors, a consulting firm in Boulder." Colorado's marijuana industry uses large amounts of energy for lighting and air conditioning. The owner of one of Colorado's largest cannabis companies said that her utility bill is approximately $40,000 a month. Ron Flax, a building sustainability expert in Boulder, said that the power demand for marijuana growing operations is five times higher than the typical monthly demand of comparable commercial buildings. Evan Mills, an energy analyst and scientist from the Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory, wrote a paper entitled, "Energy Up in Smoke: The Carbon Footprint of Indoor Cannabis Production." Her conclusion was that growing marijuana indoors requires four times more energy than a hospital on a per -square -foot basis and eight times more energy than a typical U.S. commercial building.16 SECTION 10: Related Data Page 1150 497 of 669 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 3/September 2015 THC Potency 14.00% 12.00% Potency Monitoring Program- Average THC Percent DEA-Submitted Cannabis Samples 1995 - 2013 (National) ▪ 10.00% T 1 8.00% W > 4.00% 2.00% -- -1.13% 9.58% 9.75% 8.02% 6.11% 6.00% -i581°�0 4.60°!° 3.96% 12.33% 12.55% 0.00% ----- -r T 1 r- -r -j 1995 1997 1999 2001 2003 2005 2007 2009 2011 2012 2013 SOURCE: Potency Monitoring Program, Quarterly Report Number 123, National Center for Natural Products Research (NCNRP) at the University of Mississippi, under contract with the National Institute on Drug Abuse. ❖ The 2015 average THC percent for Colorado marijuana is 17.1 percent." SECTION 10: Related Data Page 1151 498 of 669 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 3/September 2015 AverageTHC Percent 40.00% 30.00% 20.00% Potency Monitoring Program- Average THC Percent All Submitted Hash Oil Samples 1995 - 2013 (National) 19.44% 10.00% 16.21% 15.54% 1.3.23% 6.40% 0.00% —T -T -rT f-T 1 7 i 0 6.73% 52.41% T. ti10)o el, �ooti ao'v,�o'� �o°� o`� ,goo'° o`� o� ti� �titi tio�� SOURCE: Potency Monitoring Program, Quarterly Report Number 123, National Center for Natural Products Research (NCNRP) at the University of Mississippi, under contract with the National Institute on Drug Abuse. ❖ The 2015 average THC percent for Colorado concentrate is 62.1 percent.17 Colorado Marijuana Study Finds Legal Weed Contains Potent THC Levels: "In old -school dope, levels of THC — the psychoactive chemical that makes people high — were typically well below 10 percent. But in Colorado's legal bud, the average THC level is 18.7 percent, and some retail pot contains 30 percent THC or more..." A Denver lab licensed to analyze marijuana samples reports that after 600 samples provided by licensed growers and sellers, they detected little medical value and lots of contamination. "We have been finding some really dirty marijuana," said Andy LaFrate, president of Charas Scientific. He cited fungi and solvents such as butane. He also stated that the 600-plus samples generally carried little or no CBD, the compound that makes medical marijuana "medical." His study shows that the average CBD was 0.1 percent.18 THC Concentrates and Youth: "Now the threat of THC concentrates pose to public health and safety loom large. A new study from researchers at Ohio's Nationwide Children's Hospital finds more American children are exposed to marijuana before reaching their fifth birthday. The report, published in the peer -reviewed journal Clinical SECTION 10: Related Data Page 1152 499 of 669 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 3/September 2015 Pediatrics, found that, between 2006 and 2013, the marijuana exposure rate rose 147.5 percent among children age 5 and under. In that same period, the rate rose nearly 610 percent in states that sanctioned medical marijuana before 2000, the year Colorado followed suit."79 Marijuana Use and Alcohol Consumption There are some who have theorized that legalizing marijuana would reduce alcohol consumption. Thus far that theory is not supported by the data. Colorado Average Consumption of Alcohol in Gallons, Per Calendar Year 145,000,000 143,000,000 c 141,000,000 0 ti 139,000,000 137,000,000 135,000,000 133,000,000 131,000,000 2011-2012 2013-2014 SOURCE: Colorado Department of Revenue, Colorado Liquor Excise Tax Medical Marijuana Registry Medical Marijuana Registry Identification Cards20 • December 31, 2009 — 41,039 • December 31, 2010 —116,198 • December 31, 2011 — 82,089 • December 31, 2012 —108,526 • December 31, 2013 —110,979 • December 31, 2014 —115,467 SECTION 10: Related Data Page 1153 500 of 669 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 3/September 2015 Profile of Colorado Medical Marijuana Cardholders:20 • 65 percent male, with an average age of 41 years • 23 percent between the ages of 21 and 30 • 66 percent under the age of 50 • 15 percent over the age of 61 • 93 percent reporting severe pain as the medical condition • Only 5 percent reporting cancer, AIDS and glaucoma as the medical condition Percent of Patients Percent of Medical Marijuana Patients Based on Reporting Condition 100% 90% 80% 70°/0 60% 50% 40°%0 30% 20% 10% 0% G�ea �aa &a G Let areas a em ec5Sa� ae�4 SOURCE: Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment, Medical Marijuana Statistics NOTE: TOTAL DOES NOT EQUAL 100 PERCENT AS SOME PATIENTS REPORT USING MEDICAL MARIJUANA FOR MORE THAN ONE DEBILITATING MEDICAL CONDITION. Colorado Licensed Marijuana Businesses as of January 2015 Medical Marijuana:21 • 505 medical marijuana centers ("dispensaries") • 748 marijuana cultivation facilities • 163 infused products (edibles) businesses SECTION 10: Related Data Page 1154 501 of 669 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 3/September 2015 Recreational Marijuana:22 • 322 marijuana retail stores • 397 marijuana cultivation facilities • 98 infused product (edibles) businesses • 16 testing facilities Business Comparisons, January 2015 Licensed Businesses Colorado Business Comparisons, January 2015 1600 1400 1200 1000 800 600 400 200 McDonalds Starbucks Marijuana Pharmacies Liquor Stores It Medical Marijuana Dispensaries t Retail Marijuana Stores SOURCE: Colorado Department of Revenue; Starbucks Coffee Company, Corporate Office Headquarters; McDonalds Corporation, Corporate Office Headquarters SECTION 10: Related Data Page 1155 502 of 669 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Licensed Businesses 350 300 250 200 150 100 50 Vol. 3/September 2015 Denver Business Comparisons, January 2015 1 106 los 1 Pharmacies McDonalds Liquor Stores Starbucks Marijuana R Medical Marijuana Dispensaries ■ Retail Marijuana Stores SOURCE: Colorado Department of Revenue; Starbucks Coffee Company, Corporate Office Headquarters; McDonalds Corporation, Corporate Office Headquarters ❖ Denver: • 198 licensed medical marijuana centers ("dispensaries")" • 117 pharmacies (as of February 12, 2015)23 Demand and Market Size The Colorado Department of Revenue published a report in July 2014 called, "Market Size and Demand for Marijuana in Colorado."' Some of the information included: Demand: • In 2014, the established demand for marijuana by Colorado residents 21 years and older is 121.4 metric tons (267,638.44 pounds) of marijuana. • In 2014, the estimated demand for marijuana by out-of-state visitors 21 years and older is 8.9 metric tons (19,620.94 pounds). SECTION 10: Related Data Page 1156 503 of 669 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 3/September 2015 • The potential range of demand for the above two groups is between 104.2 -157.9 metric tons (between 229,719.32 and 348,106.34 pounds). Market Size: • There are an estimated 485,000 Colorado adult regular marijuana users (at least once per month), which is 9 percent of the total Colorado population of all ages (5.363 million). • Heavy users who consume marijuana nearly daily make up the top 21.8 percent of the user population but account for 66.9 percent of the demand for marijuana. • Out-of-state visitors represent about 44 percent of the metro area marijuana retail sale of marijuana and approximately 90 percent of sales in heavily -visited mountain communities. • Colorado has 23 percent of its users consume nearly daily compared to 17 percent nationally; that is 35.29 percent higher. 2014 Reported Sales of Marijuana in Colorado» • 109,578 pounds of medical marijuana flower • 36,600 pounds of recreational marijuana flower • 1,964,917 units of medical edible products • 2,850,733 units of recreational edible products ❖ A single ounce of marijuana, depending on the solvent type and production method, can produce between 347 and 413 edibles of 10 mg strength. 2014 Price of Marijuana17 1 Gram Ounce Buds/Flowers $14.03 $264.14 Edibles $24.99 (100 mg) N/A Concentrates $55.00 N/A SECTION 10: Related Data Page 1157 504 of 669 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 3/September 2015 Local Response to the Medical and Recreational Marijuana Industry in Colorado24 • 321 total local jurisdictions o 228 (71 percent) prohibit any medical or recreational marijuana businesses o 67 (21 percent) allow any medical and recreational marijuana businesses O 26 (8 percent) allow either medical or recreational marijuana businesses, not both Polling August 2015 Smith Johnson Research Poll (Colorado Survey) • In 2012: 51.5 percent favored legalization 48.5 percent opposed legalization • In 2015: 49.2 percent now favor legalization (2.3 percent drop) 50.8 percent now oppose legalization February 2014 October 2014 2013 2014 October 2014 Pew Research Center Poll Favor Legalized Oppose Legalized Unsure 54 percent 52 percent 42 percent 45 percent 3 percent 3 percent October 2014 Gallup Poll Favor Legalized Oppose Legalized Unsure 58 percent 51 percent 39 percent 47 percent 3 percent 2 percent SECTION 10: Related Data Page 1158 505 of 669 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 3/September 2015 September 2014 Suffolk University/USA Today Poll Colorado • 46 percent continue to support Amendment 64 • 50.2 percent do not agree with Amendment 64 decision SOURCE: Polling Report.com Quinnipiac University Poll, February 2015:25 • 58 percent of Coloradoans polled still support legalizing marijuana for recreational use • 38 percent are opposed ❖ November 2012 Amendment 64 election results: • 55 percent in favor • 45 percent opposed Lawsuits Lawsuit Using Federal Racketeering Laws: In February 2015, the Safe Streets Alliance filed a lawsuit on behalf of a horse farm and mountain hotel against two licensed marijuana businesses. The lawsuit, claiming damages, is utilizing the federal Racketeer Influenced and Corruption Organizations (RICO) Act. The lawsuit says, "Marijuana businesses make bad neighbors. They drive away legitimate businesses' customers, emit pungent, foul odors, attract undesirable visitors, increase criminal activity, increase traffic, and reduce property values." Five months after the suit was filed one of the defendants, a medical marijuana retail store, closed.26, 27 Colorado, Nebraska and Kansas Sheriffs and Prosecutors File Lawsuit: Twelve sheriffs and prosecutors from Colorado, Nebraska and Kansas have filed a lawsuit as a federal preemption challenge to Colorado's recreational marijuana laws. The lawsuit puts Colorado sheriffs in the position of supporting Colorado's marijuana law in violation of federal law and their oath of office. The out-of-state authorities are citing the challenges and issues of dealing with the diversion of Colorado marijuana into their states.28 SECTION 10: Related Data Page 1159 506 of 669 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 3/September 2015 Colorado Lawsuit Claims Marijuana Edibles Caused People to 'Overdose': Seven people filed a suit in Denver after they became sick from eating THC-laced treats manufactured by a licensed edible business. The plaintiffs visiting the Pot Pavilion at the Denver County Fair claimed they were told the chocolates did not contain THC. "A few hours later, though, they were in hospitals complaining about rapid heart rates, passing out, tunnel vision, and other scary symptoms." One of the plaintiffs became so sick that he uncontrollably vomited into his vehicle and was diagnosed at the emergency room as overdosing on THC.29 Fifth Amendment Lawsuit: A pro -marijuana industry attorney, on behalf of several plaintiffs, filed a lawsuit in June of 2014 alleging the payment of sales and excise taxes on the sale of recreational marijuana in Colorado violates the plaintiff's Fifth Amendment rights against self-incrimination.3° Employers Rights to Drug Tests: An employee of Dish Network, LLC filed a lawsuit against the company for having been fired for failing to pass a drug test. The individual, a licensed medical marijuana cardholder, believes he should have the right to possess and use medical marijuana under limited circumstances without fear of being fired from his place of employment." Nebraska and Oklahoma Sue Colorado Over Pot: In 2014, the states of Nebraska and Oklahoma filed a lawsuit against Colorado for legalizing recreational marijuana. The lawsuit deals with the diversion of Colorado marijuana to the states of Nebraska and Oklahoma and the burden it places on the two states. Since this is a lawsuit in which a state is suing another state, it goes directly to the Supreme Court.32 Other Issues Too Many "Stoned" Employees: In the spring of 2015, Little Spider Creations' owner is moving his company to South Carolina. The owner claims that, since Colorado legalized marijuana, too many of his employees were coming in high. He said the main reason they are leaving Colorado is that marijuana got into their industry and half of their sculptors would come to work high. He said, "We went through 25 sculptors. Only five of [our sculptors] either were quality or would show up unimpaired." He says those employees coming to work high were not as productive and tended to have a "it's good enough" attitude. The owner, a native Coloradoan, had 47 full-time employees.33 SECTION 10: Related Data Page 1160 507 of 669 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 3/September 2015 Pot Stores Find Ways of Accepting Credit Cards: Fox31 News (Denver) found that 47 percent of medical marijuana centers polled are allowing the use of credit cards although technically illegal. Apparently these medical retail stores are using holding companies that have legitimate banking relationships. That prevents the banks from knowing they are doing business with marijuana retailers.34 Edible Pot Labels Inaccurate: A study from John Hopkins University shows that more than 80 percent of product labels for marijuana edibles were inaccurate according to researchers. The study, published in the Journal of the American Medical Association, showed that only 17 percent of the labels were accurate to within 10 percent of the actual THC content.35 Sources 1 Matt Kroschel, CBS4 Mountain Newsroom, August 14, 2015, "Panhandling For Pot? Increase May Be Linked to recreational Marijuana," <http://denver.cbslocal. com/2015/08/14/panhandling-for-pot-increase-may-be-linked-to- recreational-marijuana/>, accessed August 14, 2015 2 Colorado Office of State Planning and Budget 3 Bob McGovern, BostonHerald.com, June 12, 2015, "Colorado weed czar: Revenue up in smoke," <http://www.bostonherald.com/news_opinion/local_coverage/2015/06/colorado_weed_ czar_revenue_up_in_smoke>, accessed June 15, 2015 4 The Gazette Op/Ed, March 22, 2015, "No tax windfall from medical, retail sales," <http://gazette.com/no-tax-windfal-from-medical-retail-sales/article/1548295>, accessed April 2, 2015 5 Josh Barro, The New York Times, April 9, 2015, "Marijuana Taxes Won't Save State Budgets,"<http://www.nytimes.com/2015/04/09/upshot/09up-marijuana.html?_r=0>, accessed April 13, 2015 6 Marijuana Policy Group for the Colorado Department of Revenue, Executive Summary, "Market Size and Demand for Marijuana in Colorado," July 2014 SECTION 10: Related Data Page 1161 508 of 669 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 3/September 2015 The Associated Press, The New York Times, December 24, 2014, "Denver Shelters Cite Legal Pot in Homeless Upswing," <http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/2014/12/24/us/ap-us-marijuana- homeless.html?_r=0>, accessed August 13, 2015 8 Tom McGhee, The Denver Post, July 26, 2014, "Legal pot blamed for some of influx of homeless in Denver this summer," <http://www.denverpost.com/news/ci_26216037/legal-pot-blamed-some-influx- homeless-this-summer>, accessed July 26, 2014 9 Jace Larson, Click2Houston.com, September 22, 2014, "Legalized recreational marijuana use draws homeless Texans to Colorado," <http://www. click2houston.com/news/pot-draws-homeless-texans-to- colorado/28186888>, accessed September 23, 2014 70 Sheriff Justin Smith, "Interesting Info for RMHIDTA," e-mail message, August 20, 2015. " Trevor Hughes, USAToday, May 15, 2015, "Judge: Pot believed to have pesticide can be seized," <http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2015/05/15/marijuana- pesticide-use-quarantine/27367563/>, accessed May 15, 2015 12 Sarah Yang, Berkeley News, June 24, 2015, "Environment takes big hit from water - intensive marijuana cultivation,"<http://news.berkeley.edu/2015/06/24/marijuana- environmental-impact/>, accessed June 24, 2015 13 Barbara Hardt, May 14, 2015, The Mountain -Ear, "Side Effects of Legal Marijuana," <http://themtnear.com/2015/05/side-effects-of-legal-marijuana/>, accessed May 15, 2015 14 Rick Carroll, The Aspen Times, June 9, 2015, "Residents" Marijuana stink means property values sink," <http://www.aspentimes.com/news/16724245-113/residents- marijuana-stink-means-property-values-sink>, accessed June 9, 2015 15 Bruce Finley, The Denver Post, July 1, 2015, "Marijuana -growing spikes Denver electric demand, challenges clean -power plan," <http://www. denverpost.com/environment/ci_28417456/pot-boom-spikes-denver- electric-demand-challenges-clean>, accessed July 1, 2015 16 Cathy Proctor, Denver Business Journal, August 7, 2015, "Colorado pot growers face sky-high power bills," <http://www.bizjournals.com/denver/print- SECTION 10: Related Data Page 1162 509 of 669 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 3/September 2015 edition/2015/08/07/colorado-pot-growers-face-sky-high-power-bills.html>, accessed August 7, 2015 " Colorado Department of Revenue, "Marijuana Equivalency in Portions and Dosage", August 10, 2015 18 Bill Briggs, NBC News, March 23, 2015, "Colorado Marijuana Study Finds Legal Weed Contains Potent THC Levels," <http://www.nbcnews.com/storyline/legal- pot/legal-weed-surprisingly-strong-dirty-tests-find-n327811>, accessed April 8, 2015 79 The Gazette Op/Ed, Sunday, June 21, 2015, "THC extracts concentrate problems," <http://m. gazette. corn/clearing-the-haze-thc-extracts-concentrate- problems/article/1554097>, accessed June 22, 2015 �0 Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment, "Medical Marijuana Registry Program Update (as of March 31, 2015)", <http s://www. colorado. gov/pacific/sites/def ault/files/03_2015_%20MMR_report_draft. p df>, accessed May 15, 2015 21 Colorado Department of Revenue, Enforcement Division 22 John IngoId, The Denver Post, February 20, 2014, "Lot of green will roll in" 23 Colorado Department of Regulatory Agencies, State Board of Pharmacy 24 Colorado Department of Revenue, Enforcement Division — Marijuana, Annual Update, February 27, 2015 25 Quinnipiac University, News and Events, Quinnipiac University Poll, Release Detail, February 24, 2015, "Colorado, Iowa, Virginia Governors Get Good Grades Quinnipiac University Swing State Poll Finds; Colorado Voters Still High On Legalized Marijuana," <http://www.quinnipiac.edu/news-and-events/quinnipiac-university- poll/search-releases/search-results/release- detail?ReleaselD=2166&What=&strArea=16;28;26;&strTime=12>, accessed February 24, 2015 26 Kristen Wyatt, The Associated Press, February 19, 2015, "Colorado residents are first to ask feds to block legal pot," < http://news.yahoo.com/colorado-residents-first- ask-feds-block-legal-pot-175909907--finance.html>, accessed February 19, 2015 SECTION 10: Related Data Page 1163 510 of 669 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 3/September 2015 27 Kristen Wyatt, The Associated Press, July 13, 2015, "Marijuana opponents using racketeering law to fight industry," <http://news.yahoo.com/marijuana-opponents- using-racketeering-law-fight-industry-180311017.htm1>, accessed July 13, 2015 28 Monte Stiles, Sheriffs and Prosecutors from CO, NE and KS Announce Federal - Preemption Legal Challenge to Colorado's "Recreational -Marijuana" Law, e-mail message, March 5, 2015 29 John Dyer, Vice News, January 15, 2015, "Colorado Lawsuit Claims Marijuana Edibles Caused People to 'Overdose'," <https://news.vice.com/article/colorado-lawsuit- claims-marijuana-edibles-caused-people-to-overdose>, accessed January 15, 2015 3o Drug Enforcement Administration Intelligence Note, August 2014, "Marijuana Taxes vs. the Right Against Self -Incrimination" 31 Brandon Coats, Petitioner vs. Dish Network, LLC, Respondent, Case No. 2013SC394, Supreme Court, State of Colorado, State of Colorado's Amicus Brief in Support of Respondent Dish Network, LLC, filed May 21, 2014 32 Rocky Mountain High Intensity Drug Trafficking Area, 2014 33 USA Today Network and Jen Marnowski, KUSA 9News, April 23, 2015, "Too many high employees prompts company to leave Colorado," , <http://www.ksdk. com/story/news/nation-now/2015/04/23/too-many-high-employ ees- prompts-company-to-leave-colorado/26279165/>, accessed April 24, 2015 34 Chris Halsne, Fox31 Denver, April 27, 2015, "Visa for pot: The credit card smokescreen," <http://kdvr.com/2015/04/27/visa-for-pot-the-credit-card-smokescreen/>, accessed May 28, 2015 35 CBC News British Columbia, June 25, 2015, "Most edible pot products labelled with inaccurate THC content, finds new U.S. study," <http ://www.cb c. ca/news/canada/british-columbia/most-edible-p ot-pro ducts-labelled- with-inaccurate-thc-content-finds-new-u-s-study-1.3126793>, accessed June 25, 2015 36 Colorado Violent Death Reporting System, Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment (CDPHE) SECTION 10: Related Data Page 1164 511 of 669 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 3/September 2015 SECTION 11: Reference Materials Reports ❑ ANNUAL UPDATE BY THE COLORADO DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE, ENFORCEMENT DIVISION - MARIJUANA, FEBRUARY 27, 2015 This report includes information on the Marijuana Enforcement Division's activities related to medical and recreational marijuana businesses as well as data concerning cultivation and distribution of marijuana by licensed businesses in Colorado. ❑ MARKET SIZE AND DEMAND FOR MARIJUANA IN COLORADO PREPARED FOR THE COLORADO DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE BY THE MARIJUANA POLICY GROUP, MILES K. LIGHT ET AL This report provides estimates for the demand for marijuana and the characteristics of Colorado's market for marijuana. ❑ MARIJUANA EQUIVALENCY IN PORTIONS AND DOSAGE BY THE COLORADO DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE, AUGUST 2015 This report is an assessment of physical and pharmacokinetic relationships in marijuana products and consumption in Colorado. ❑ MONITORING HEALTH CONCERNS RELATED TO MARIJUANA IN COLORADO: 2014, PUBLISHED BY THE COLORADO DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC HEALTH AND ENVIRONMENT Based on legislative mandate, the Colorado Department of Health and Environment appointed a thirteen -member committee to review the scientific literature on the health effects of marijuana including Colorado -specific outcomes and use data. This report looks at changes in marijuana use in Colorado and also reviews literature on marijuana use and health effects. The committee, in reviewing the literature, judges the findings based on the evidence including categories such as substantial evidence, limited evidence, insufficient evidence, etc. SECTION 11: Reference Materials Page 1165 512 of 669 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 3/September 2015 O COLORADO'S LEGALIZATION OF MARIJUANA AND IMPACT ON PUBLIC SAFETY: A PRACTICAL GUIDE FOR LAW ENFORCEMENT, PUBLISHED BY THE COLORADO ASSOCIATION OF CHIEFS OF POLICE AND THE POLICE FOUNDATION This report focuses on identifying "Colorado's public safety challenges, solutions, and unresolved issues with legalized medical marijuana and recreational marijuana." ❑ POST -LEGALIZATION OF RETAIL MARIJUANA: A STUDY FOCUSING ON EFFECTS OF CRIME, LIVABILITY AND PERCEPTIONS OF CRIME IN THE DENVER METRO AREA, EARLY SUMMER 2015 BY METROPOLITAN STATE UNIVERSITY This report examines crime in Denver and homelessness since the first recreational retail businesses went into effect January 1 2014. ❑ DENVER METRO AREA SENTINEL COMMUNITY EPIDEMIOLOGY REPORT #1, MAY 15, 2015 BY THE DENVER OFFICE OF DRUG STRATEGY, PREPARED BY BRUCE MENDELSON, MPA, DENVER METRO AREA SENTINEL COMMUNITY EPIDEMIOLOGIST This report includes "data collection, analysis, and discussions" regarding alcohol and drug abuse in Denver and the Denver Metro area. ❑ MARIJUANA DATA DISCOVERYAND GAP ANALYSIS SUMMARY REPORT, SEPTEMBER 4, 2014 BY REBOUND SOLUTIONS This report by Rebound Solutions for the state of Colorado analyzes available data to gauge the impact of the legalization of marijuana has on the state of Colorado. This report identifies data, the value of the data and the gaps involved in doing a complete assessment. ❑ HEALTHY KIDS COLORADO SURVEY2013, SEPTEMBER 2014 PREPARED FOR THE COLORADO DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION, COLORADO DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN SERVICES AND COLORADO DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC HEALTH AND ENVIRONMENT BY THE UNIVERSITY OF COLORADO-DENVER COMMUNITY EPIDEMIOLOGY AND PROGRAM EVALUATION GROUP This report collected self -reported health information from Colorado middle to high school students related to a number of issues including drug abuse. ❑ FEDERAL PROPOSALS TO TAX MARIJUANA: AN ECONOMIC ANALYSIS, NOVEMBER 13, 2014 BY THE CONGRESSIONAL RESEARCH SERVICE, JANE G. GRAVELLE, ET AL This report "focuses solely on issues surrounding a potential federal marijuana tax." It provides a brief overview of marijuana production, justification estimate levels of tax and possible marijuana tax designs. SECTION 11: Reference Materials Page 1166 513 of 669 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 3/September 2015 ❑ EXAMINING THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN MARIJUANA USE, MEDICAL MARIJUANA DISPENSARIES, AND ABUSIVE AND NEGLECTFUL PARENTING BY FREISTHLER, B., ET AL. This study examines whether and how current marijuana use, and the physical availability of marijuana, are related to child physical abuse, supervisory neglect, or physical neglect by parents while controlling a child, caregiver or family characteristics in a general population survey in California. ❑ WHAT WILL LEGAL MARIJUANA COST EMPLOYERS, 2014 BY NATIONAL FAMILIES IN ACTION This report covers the impact of legal marijuana on employers dealing with safety, litigation, compliance and productivity. ❑ 1-502 EVALUATION PLAN AND PRELIMINARY REPORT ON IMPLEMENTATION BY WASHINGTON STATE INSTITUTE FOR PUBLIC POLICY, SEPTEMBER 2015 ❑ THE EFFECTS OF CANNABIS USE DURING ADOLESCENCE, 2015 BY THE CANADIAN CENTRE ON SUBSTANCE ABUSE This report covers the impact of marijuana use on youth including the brain, mental illness and addiction. ❑ 'HIGH' ACHIEVERS? CANNABIS ACCESS AND ACADEMIC PERFORMANCE, BY OLIVIER MARIE AND ULF ZOLITZ, INSTITUTE FOR THE STUDY OF LABOR, BONN, GERMANY, MARCH 2015 This report investigates the impact of marijuana on student performance. ❑ RESULTS OF THE 2013-2014 NATIONAL ROADSIDE SURVEY OF ALCOHOL AND DRUG USE BY DRIVERS BY THE NATIONAL HIGHWAY TRAFFIC SAFETY ADMINISTRATION, FEBRUARY 2015 Articles ❑ AMERICAN ACADEMY OF PEDIATRICS REAFFIRMS OPPOSITION TO LEGALIZATION OF MARIJUANA FOR RECREATIONAL OR MEDICAL USE, JANUARY 26, 2015 BY THE AMERICAN ACADEMY OF PEDIATRICS This policy statement opposing the legalization of marijuana also has some recommendations from the American Academy of Pediatrics. SECTION 11: Reference Materials Page 1167 514 of 669 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 3/September 2015 ❑ AMERICAN EPILEPSY SOCIETY PRESIDENT SAYS SIDE EFFECTS OF ARTISANAL CBD OILS CAN BE SO SEVERE No PEDIATRIC NEUROLOGIST IN COLORADO WILL RECOMMEND THEM, FROM NATIONAL FAMILIES IN ACTION & PARTNERS, THE MARIJUANA REPORT E- NEWSLETTER, JUNE 24, 2015 This article discusses medical marijuana related to CBD. ❑ ANY DOSE OF ALCOHOL COMBINED WITH CANNABIS SIGNIFICANTLY INCREASES LEVELS OF THC IN BLOOD, AMERICAN ASSOCIATION FOR CLINICAL CHEMISTRY, MAY 27, 2015 AS REPORTED IN ScienceDaiIy This article points to a study for the first time that the use of alcohol and marijuana produces a significantly higher blood concentration of THC than use of marijuana alone. ❑ EVIDENCE LINKING MARIJUANA AND RISK OF STROKE GROWS, AMERICAN HEART ASSOCIATION/NEWSROOM, FEBRUARY 20, 2015 This article reports that smoking marijuana may increase the chance of having a stroke. ❑ MARIJUANA BY THE AMERICAN LUNG ASSOCIATION (WEBSITE) This report discusses the negative impact of marijuana on health and youth. ❑ MARIJUANA AND MADNESS: CLINICAL IMPLICATIONS OF INCREASED AVAILABILITY AND POTENCY, ROBIN M. MURRAY, MD, PROFESSOR OF PSYCHIATRIC RESEARCH AT THE INSTITUTE OF PSYCHIATRY, KING'S COLLEGE LONDON, PSYCHIATRIC TIMES, APRIL 30, 2015 In the Psychiatric Times this article discussed use and potency as well as cognitive impairment, psychosis, the developing brain and other implications. Cl MARIJUANA USE DURING PREGNANCY AND LACTATION, JULY 2015 BY THE AMERICAN COLLEGE OF OBSTETRICIAN AND GYNECOLOGISTS, COMMITTEE ON OBSTETRIC PRACTICE This report discusses the use of marijuana while pregnant. ❑ PROPORTION OF PATIENTS IN SOUTH LONDON WITH FIRST -EPISODE PSYCHOSIS ATTRIBUTABLE TO USE OF HIGH POTENCY CANNABIS: A CASE -CONTROL STUDY, DEFORTI, ET AL, DEPARTMENT OF PSYCHOSIS STUDIES, INSTITUTE OF PSYCHIATRY, KING'S COLLEGE, LONDON, UK, LANCET PSYCHIATRY2O15 In the Lancet Psychiatry 2015 this study investigates how frequent use of high - potency marijuana in south London is associated with psychotic disorders. SECTION 11: Reference Materials Page 1168 515 of 669 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 3/September 2015 ❑ STUDY: SCANT EVIDENCE THAT MEDICAL POT HELPS MANY ILLNESSES, JUNE 23, 2015, AP MEDICAL WRITER LINDSEY TANNER, WITH HIGHLIGHTS FROM THE JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN MEDICAL ASSOCIATION This articles states, "Medical marijuana has not been proven to work for many illnesses that state laws have approved it for, according to the first comprehensive analysis of research on its potential benefits." ❑ MARIJUANA STUDY: MEDICAL POT ISN'T PROVEN, BYRICARDO BACA, THE DENVER POST BY RICARDO BACA, THE DENVER POST, JUNE 24, 2014 This article discusses a study published in the Journal of the American Medical Association concerning an analysis involving 6,500 participants that shows marijuana's efficacy regarding most related conditions is unproven. ❑ TEEN CANNABIS USERS HAVE POOR LONG-TERM MEMORY IN ADULTHOOD, MARCH 12, 2015, NORTHWESTERN UNIVERSITY This article discusses heavy teenage marijuana users having abnormally -shaped brain hippocampus that affects long-term memory. ❑ WHAT HAS RESEARCH OVER THE PAST TWO DECADES REVEALED ABOUT THE ADVERSE HEALTH EFFECTS OF RECREATIONAL CANNABIS USE?, WAYNE HALL, THE UNIVERSITY OF QUEENSLAND CENTRE FOR YOUTH SUBSTANCE ABUSE RESEARCH, HERSTON, AUSTRALIA, AUGUST 4, 2014, Addiction, 110. 19-35 This study examines the adverse impact of marijuana on health. SECTION 11: Reference Materials Page 1169 516 of 669 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 3/September 2015 THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK SECTION 11: Reference Materials Page 1170 517 of 669 518 of 669 Rocky Mountain High Intensity Drug Trafficking Area Investigative Support Center Denver, Colorado www.rmhidta.ors/reports 519 of 669 CPCA Findings on Marijuana Lise Brain Development and Public Health • In a paper published on November 10, 2014 in Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, researchers for the first time comprehensively describe existing abnormalities in brain function and structure of long-term marijuana users with multiple magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) techniques. Findings show chronic marijuana users have smaller brain volume in the orbitofrontal cortex (OFC), a part of the brain commonly associated with addiction, but also increased brain connectivity. • In a study published on October 2, 2012 in Proceedings of the National Academy of Science, researchers found that persistent cannabis use was associated with neuropsychological decline broadly across domains of functioning, even after controlling for years of education. Informants also reported noticing more cognitive problems for persistent cannabis users. Impairment was concentrated among adolescent -onset cannabis users, with more persistent use associated with greater decline. Further, cessation of cannabis use did not fully restore neuropsychological functioning among adolescent -onset cannabis users. • In 2011, marijuana accounted for 38 percent of ED visits in which illicit drugs were mentioned (about 450,000 visits, or one for every 40 past -month marijuana users; SAMHSA, 2013a, Table 4); this is a 62-percent increase since 2004 (SAMHSA, 2013a, Table 9). The most common stated reason for these visits is "unexpected reaction" (Kissin and Ball, 2003), which is usually a transient panic attack brought on by extreme intoxication. • Marijuana smoke contains many of the same carcinogens as tobacco smoke (Moir et al., 2008). • According to the National Institute on Drug Abuse/ National Institute of Health, approximately 9 percent, or 1 in 11, of those who use marijuana will become addicted. This rate increases to 17 percent, or about 1 in 6, if you start in your teens. • The Rocky Mountain High Intensity Drug Trafficking Area (HIDTA) reports that ED visits related to marijuana (for those of any age) increased in Colorado by 29 percent in the first year after legalization of personal possession and use (12,888 in 2013 versus 9,982 in 2012), and that was before stores selling recreational marijuana opened. • According to Colorado Public Radio, on April 29, 2014 "The head of the emergency room at one of Denver's largest hospitals says he's seeing more Michaels 2015 520 of 669 people being admitted after consuming large quantities of edible marijuana in the form of cookies or other foods. Dr. Richard Zane, head of the Department of Emergency Medicine at the University of Colorado Hospital, says the increase coincides with the legalization of recreational marijuana...Dr. Zane says University Hospital is admitting about a person a day for pot -related problems, and most are linked to edibles." • According to a doctor's account at Colorado's Telluride Medical Center, "I have served in emergency departments for over 15 years. During those first ten years I don't recall treating a single case of an adverse reaction to marijuana. This changed as medicinal marijuana use became more prevalent. Now, after the legalization of recreational marijuana, I'm noticing a dramatic increase in emergency visits related to the drug...The majority of patients reporting marijuana related emergencies at the Telluride Medical Center have the same symptoms: severe nausea and vomiting, anxiety, elevated heart, respiratory and blood pressure rates...A recent study published by the journal JAMA Pediatrics reported a spike in the number of young children treated at Children's Hospital Colorado for accidentally eating marijuana treats. The study found that in the two years after marijuana laws were liberalized in 2009,14 kids were treated for accidental ingestion. In the four years before the change, the study found no children had been hospitalized for accidental ingestion. • According to the 2012 National Survey for Drug Use and Health (conducted by the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services), because they are accessible and available, our legal drugs are used far more than our illegal ones. According to recent surveys, alcohol use is used by 52% of Americans and tobacco is used by 27% of Americans. Marijuana is used by 8% of Americans. • According to the national organization "Smart Approaches to Marijuana," for every $1 in alcohol and tobacco tax revenues, society loses $10 in social costs, from accidents to health damage. o LM Note: unable to find primary source of this statistic. • According to the University of Mississippi Potency -Monitoring Project, since 1983, when the THC concentrations averaged below 5 percent, potency has intensified with today's potency averaging 14% with peek content exceeding 30%. In BHO was it is up to 95% THC Michaels 2015 521 of 669 Impact on Youth • In Colorado, Drug -related suspensions/ expulsions increased 40 percent from school years 2008/2009 to 2013/2014. The vast majority were for marijuana violations (HIDTA). • Legalization diminishes perceived risk of use among high school students. A 2013 study conducted by the Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment found that the percentage of high school students who thought there was moderate or great risk from marijuana declined from 58 percent in 2011 to 54 percent in 2013. • ED episodes involving children are a particular concern. Colorado has experienced an increase in young children admitted to EDs because of accidental ingestion of marijuana infused edibles (e.g., Ingold, 2014b; Wang, Roosevelt, and Heard, 2013). According to an article in The Denver Post published in May 2014, nine children went to just one hospital ED (Children's Hospital Colorado) between January and May 2014, which was more than it saw the entire year before. Seven of the nine were admitted to the hospital's intensive care unit to be watched due to extreme sedation and agitation, and one required a respirator. • In a January 2015 Policy Statement, the American Academy of Pediatrics stated that "The AAP opposes legalization of marijuana because of the potential harms to children and adolescents. The AAP supports studying the effects of recent laws legalizing the use of marijuana to better understand the impact and define best policies to reduce adolescent marijuana use." • In Colorado, there was a 20 percent increase in the percent of 12 to 17 year old probationers testing positive for marijuana since marijuana was legalized for recreational purposes (HIDTA). • Children's Hospital Colorado reported 2 marijuana ingestions among children under 12 in 2009 compared to 16 in 2014 (HIDTA). Drugged Driving • The 2007 National Roadside Survey found that the most prevalent drug detected in the pilot study was marijuana. In 2009, marijuana accounted for 25 percent of all positive drug tests for fatally injured drivers for whom drug -test results were known and 43 percent among fatalities involving drivers 24 years of age and younger with known drug -test results. • Downey (2012) finds that the increase of THC dosage alone influences perception of what is a safe distance to leave between cars. Furthermore, differences in the Michaels 2015 522 of 669 amount of "straddling the solid line," "straddling the barrier line," "insufficient stopped clear space" occur when THC was consumed (rather than a placebo). • Li (2011) finds that drivers who test positive for marijuana or self -report using marijuana are more than twice as likely as other drivers to be involved in motor vehicle crashes • Bosker (2012) finds that cannabis is significantly related to performance on the one -leg stand test. • According to a May 2014 Denver Post article, in 2011, the proportion of drivers in fatal crashes in Colorado testing positive for marijuana had risen to 10 percent — up from 5.9 percent in early 2009. o LM Note: Even with a 5 nanogram per se in Colorado, drugged driving has increased. Black Market Activity • PBS recently did a program on black market activity in Colorado, "One of the benefits attached to legalization was that it would eliminate the black market. But that market is still thriving, according to a 39 year old marijuana grower who asked us to call him John Doe and to conceal his identity because he sells on the underground market.... John Doe says low-income buyers turn to the black market because prices are higher at legal retail stores. There's conflicting information, but an ounce of pot on the black market can cost as little as $180. At the store Andy Williams owns, you have to pay around $240 for an ounce...The illegal trade is doing especially well in black and Latino communities, and he says it works the same way it did when pot was illegal." • According to an April 2014 Washington Times article, legalization has done nothing more than enhance the opportunity for the black market. • During 2009 - 2012, when medical marijuana was commercialized, the yearly average number of interdiction seizures of Colorado marijuana increased 365 percent from 52 to 242 per year. During 2013 - 2014, when recreational marijuana was legalized, the yearly average interdiction seizures of Colorado marijuana increased another 34 percent from 242 to 324 (HIDTA). • The average pounds of Colorado marijuana seized, destined for 36 other states, increased 33 percent from 2005 - 2008 compared to 2009 - 2014 (HIDTA). • U.S. mail parcel interceptions of Colorado marijuana, destined for 38 other states, increased 2,033 percent from 2010 - 2014 (HIDTA). • Pounds of Colorado marijuana seized in the U.S. mail, destined for 38 other states, increased 722 percent from 2010 - 2014 (HIDTA). Michaels 2015 523 of 669 Our Penal System • As of Januaryl, 2011 possession of one ounce or less of marijuana is an infraction punishable by a maximum $100 fine with no criminal record under CA Health and Safety Code 11357b. • According to the Office of the Attorney General, there were 13,779 marijuana - related felony arrests in California in 2013, compared to 85,035 "dangerous drug" related felony arrests. Because personal possession is an infraction, these felony arrests apply to illicit sale and illicit cultivation (meaning sale and cultivation occurring outside of permitted medical marijuana activity). Michaels 2015 524 of 669 ADDITIONAL REFERENCES AND SOURCES: Research Report Series: Marijuana," National Institute of Health, National Institute on Drug Abuse; July 2012. For quick reference, see "Drug Facts: Marijuana": National Institute of Health, National Institute on Drug Abuse; January 2014, available at: https://www.drugabuse.gov/publications/drugfacts/marijuana. California Healthy Kids Survey Research Report Series: Marijuana," National Institute of Health, National Institute on Drug Abuse; July 2012. For quick reference, see "Drug Facts: Marijuana": National Institute of Health, National Institute on Drug Abuse; January 2014, available at: https://www.drugabuse.gov/publications/drugfacts/marijuana. http://www.acpeds.org/marijuana-use-detrimental-to-youth http ://www. rmhidta. org/html/2015%20FINAL%2OLEGALIZATION%200F%20MARIJUANA %20IN%2000LORADO%20THE%20IMP ACT.pdf ARIZONA REFERENCES "Research Report Series: Marijuana," National Institute of Health, National Institute on Drug Abuse; July 2012. For quick reference, see "Drug Facts: Marijuana": National Institute of Health, National Institute on Drug Abuse; January 2014, available at: https://www.drugabuse.gov/publications/drugfacts/marijuana. "Arizona Youth Survey: State Report," Arizona Criminal Justice Commission, 2012; p. 32. For quick reference, see "Arizona Youth Survey 2012: Marijuana Data Brief." "Research Report Series: Marijuana," National Institute of Health, National Institute on Drug Abuse; July 2012. "Drug Facts: Marijuana": National Institute of Health, National Institute on Drug Abuse; January 2014, available at: https://www.drugabuse.gov/publications/drugfacts/marijuana Meier, Madeline H.; Caspi, Avshalom, et. al., "Persistent Cannabis Users Show Neuropsychological Decline From Childhood to Midlife," Proceeding of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America", vol. 109 no. 40; October 2, 2012. Calkins, Kathryn, "Early Onset, Regular Cannabis Use Is Linked to IQ Decline," National Institute on Drug Abuse; August 13, 2013. Accompanying video presentation by Dr. Madeline Meier, located at: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gJXnxHYapbE. "Marijuana's Lasting Effects on the Brain," National Institute on Drug Abuse; March 2013. "Heavy marijuana users have abnormal brain structure and poor memory," Science Codex; December 6, 2013. "Heavy marijuana users have abnormal brain structure and poor memory," Science Codex; December 6, 2013. ,. "Arizona Youth Survey: State Report," Arizona Criminal Justice Commission, 2012; p. 58. "Two New Studies Conclude Marijuana Use Connected to College Failure," Community Anti -Drug Coalitions of America; March 28, 2013. 525 of 669 "Two New Studies Conclude Marijuana Use Connected to College Failure," Community Anti - Drug Coalitions of America; March 28, 2013. "Is there a link between marijuana use and mental illness?" National Institute on Drug Abuse; July 2012. MacDonald, Ann, "Teens who smoke pot at risk for later schizophrenia, psychosis," Harvard Health; March 7, 2011. Bergland, Christopher, "Heavy Marijuana Use Alters Teenage Brain Structure," Psychology Today; December 16, 2013. "" "Research Report Series: Marijuana," National Institute of Heal Health, National Institute on Drug Abuse; July 2012. For quick reference, see "Drug Facts: Marijuana": National Institute of Health, National Institute on Drug Abuse; January 2014, available at: https://www.drugabuse.gov/publications/drugfacts/marijuana. "Arizona Youth Survey: State Report," Arizona Criminal Justice Commission, 2012. For quick reference, see "Arizona Youth Survey 2012: Marijuana Data Brief."This prediction by the Arizona Criminal Justice Commission is an extrapolation based on the date included in the "Arizona Youth Survey: State Report," Arizona Criminal Justice Commission, 2012. ' "Research Report Series: Marijuana," National Institute of Health, National Institute on Drug Abuse; July 2012. For quick reference, see "Drug Facts: Marijuana": National Institute of Health, National Institute on Drug Abuse; January 2014, available at: https://www.drugabuse.gov/publications/drugfacts/marijuana. "How cannabis suppresses immune functions: cannabis compounds found to trigger unique immune cells which promote cancer growth," Wiley -Blackwell, ScienceDaily; November 26, 2010. "Drug Facts: Drugged Driving," National Institute of Health, National Institute on Drug Abuse; October 2013. '" "Drug Facts: Drugged Driving," National Institute of Health, National Institute on Drug Abuse; October 2013." "The Public Health Consequences of Marijuana Legalization," White House Fact Sheet. Kilmer, Beau, et al., "Altered States? Assessing How Marijuana Legalization in California Could Influence Marijuana Consumption and Public Budgets," RAND Corp.; 2010. "Marijuana in the Workplace," University of Washington, Alcohol & Drug Abuse Institute; August 2013. "' "The Public Health Consequences of Marijuana Legalization," White House Fact Sheet. 526 of 669 ORDINANCE NO. 2016 — 2414 AN URGENCY ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF NATIONAL CITY PURSUANT TO CALIFORNIA GOVERNMENT CODE SECTIONS 36934 AND 36937 ADDING CHAPTER 10.14 TO TITLE 10 OF THE NATIONAL CITY MUNICIPAL CODE TO PROHIBIT ALL COMMERCIAL MARIJUANA ACTIVITY IN THE CITY OF NATIONAL CITY, REGULATE THE CULTIVATION OF RECREATIONAL MARIJUANA FOR PERSONAL USE, AND REGULATE THE POSSESSION OF RECREATIONAL MARIJUANA IN ANTICIPATION OF PROPOSITION 64, THE CONTROL, REGULATE, AND TAX ADULT USE OF MARIJUANA ACT ("AUMA"), PASSING ON NOVEMBER 8, 2016 WHEREAS, National City is committed to the success and positive future of its community youth, and to the health and safety of its residents; and WHEREAS, National City supports efforts to decrease and prevent youth use of and exposure to non -medical marijuana and other drugs; and WHEREAS, marijuana use can be harmful to the adolescent brain, affecting the parts of the brain that influence pleasure, memory, thinking, concentration, sensory and time perception, and coordinated movement; and WHEREAS, a ballot measure titled the "Adult Use of Marijuana" to permit commercial sales of non -medical marijuana in California will be on the November 2016 General Election ballot; and WHEREAS, analysis of the "Adult Use of Marijuana" ("AUMA") initiative by the San Diego District Attorney's office points out, "The initiative allows persons convicted of dealing large amounts of controlled substances such as heroin (up to 20,000 individual doses), methamphetamine (up to 10,000 individual doses) to become `legal marijuana dealers"; and WHEREAS, the analysis further notes that the initiative permits convicted felony drug dealers who have used children to courier drugs to an adult buyer to be eligible to apply for a California marijuana license; and WHEREAS, there are no provisions in the initiative to prevent advertising and marketing to children and teens near parks, community centers, child -focused businesses, and community colleges; and WHEREAS, the High Intensity Drug Trafficking Areas ("HIDTA") statistics for marijuana use in Colorado teens ages 12-17 are 74% above the national average; and WHEREAS, the initiative allows for the indoor growing of up to six marijuana plants per residence and each plant requires 6 gallons of water per day in a state that is currently battling a drought; and 527 of 669 WHEREAS, in Colorado, where non -medical marijuana is legal and commercialized, marijuana -related traffic deaths increased 92% from 2010 to 2014 while all traffic deaths increased only 8 percent during the same time period; and WHEREAS, a study released in May 2016 by AAA Foundation for Traffic Research found that fatal crashes involving drivers who recently used marijuana doubled in Washington after the state legalized the drug; and WHEREAS, National City is highly concerned of the likelihood of a severe increase in fatal crashes or incidents involving drivers who recently used marijuana should marijuana be legalized in the State of California. NOW THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of National City does ordain as follows: Section 1. The above recitals are incorporated as true and correct and the City Council finds this Urgency Ordinance necessary for the immediate preservation of the public health, safety, and welfare within the meaning of the Government Code, and this Urgency Ordinance is adopted and shall take effect if Proposition 64, the Control, Regulate, and Tax Adult Use of Marijuana Act ("AUMA") passes on November 8, 2016. Section 2. Title 10 of the National City Municipal Code is amended by adding Chapter 10.14 to read as follows: Chapter 10.14 RECREATIONAL MARIJUANA Sections: 10.14.010 Definitions. 10.14.020 Commercial marijuana activity — Prohibited. 10.14.030 Cultivation of recreational marijuana for personal use. 10.14.040 Possession of recreational marijuana. 10.14.050 Smoking of marijuana in public - Prohibited. 10.14.060 Penalties. 10.14.070 Enforcement. 10.14.080 Non -exclusivity. 10.14.090 Severability. 10.14.010 Definitions. A. For purposes of this chapter, "marijuana" shall have the same meaning as the definition of that word in Section 11018 of the California Health and Safety Code. Urgency Ordinance No. 2016 - 2414 2 Adding Chapter 10.14 to prohibit all October 18, 2016 commerical marijuana activity in National City 528 of 669 B. "Commercial marijuana activity" includes the cultivation, possession, manufacture, distribution, processing, storing, laboratory testing, labeling, transportation, distribution, delivery, or sale of marijuana and marijuana products. C. "Cultivation of marijuana" shall mean the planting, growing, cultivating, harvesting, drying, curing, grading, trimming or processing of marijuana as defined in Business and Professions Code section 26001. D. Delivery means the commercial transfer of marijuana or marijuana products to a customer. Delivery also includes the use by a retailer of any technology platform owned and controlled by the retailer, or independently licensed, that enables customers to arrange for or facilitate the commercial transfer by a licensed retailer of marijuana or marijuana products as defined in Business and Professions Code section 26001(h). E. "Marijuana accessories" shall have the same meaning as section 11018.2 of the Health and Safety Code. Any equipment, products, or materials of any kind which are used, intended for use, or designed for use in planting, propagating, cultivating, growing, harvesting, manufacturing, compounding, converting, producing, processing, preparing, testing, analyzing, packaging, repackaging, storing, smoking, vaporizing, or containing marijuana, or for ingesting, inhaling, or otherwise introducing marijuana or marijuana products into the human body. F. "Marijuana cultivation facility" means an entity licensed to cultivate, prepare, and package marijuana and sell marijuana to retail marijuana stores, to marijuana product manufacturing facilities, and to other marijuana cultivation facilities, but not to consumers. G. "Marijuana establishment" means a marijuana cultivation facility, a marijuana testing facility, a marijuana product manufacturing facility, or a retail marijuana store. H. "Marijuana product manufacturing facility" means an entity licensed to purchase marijuana; manufacture, prepare, and package marijuana products; and sell marijuana and marijuana products to other marijuana product manufacturing facilities and to retail marijuana stores, but not to consumers. "Marijuana products" means concentrated marijuana products and marijuana products that are comprised of marijuana and other ingredients and are intended for use of consumptions, such as, but not limited to, edible products, ointments and tinctures and as otherwise defined in section 11018.1 of the Health and Safety Code. J. "Marijuana storage facility" means any entity or premise used for the storage or marijuana, marijuana products or marijuana accessories. K. "Marijuana testing facility" means an entity licensed to analyze and certify the safety and potency of marijuana. L. "Private Residence" means a house, an apartment unit, a mobile home, or other similar habitable dwelling as defined in Health and Safety Code section 11362.2(b)(5). M. "Retail marijuana store" includes any entity licensed to purchase marijuana from marijuana cultivation facilities and marijuana and marijuana products from marijuana product manufacturing facilities and to sell marijuana and marijuana products to consumers; or any premises, whether licensed or unlicensed, where marijuana, marijuana products, or devices for the use of marijuana or marijuana products are offered, either individually or in any combination, for retail sale, including an establishment that delivers marijuana and marijuana products as part of a retail sale. Urgency Ordinance No. 2016 - 2414 3 Adding Chapter 10.14 to prohibit all October 18, 2016 commerical marijuana activity in National City 529 of 669 10.14.020 Commercial marijuana activity - Prohibited. The licensing and/or operation of marijuana cultivation facilities, marijuana product manufacturing facilities, marijuana testing facilities, marijuana delivery businesses, marijuana storage facilities, retail marijuana stores, marijuana establishments, or any commercial marijuana activity is prohibited. 10.14.030 Cultivation of recreational marijuana for personal use. A. Outdoor Cultivation. The cultivation of marijuana outdoors is prohibited regardless of purpose. B. Indoor Cultivation. Not more than six plants may be cultivated, planted, harvested, dried, processed or possessed within a single private residence at one time per Health and Safety Code section 11362.2(a). 10.14.040 Possession of recreational marijuana. A. It is unlawful for a person under the age of twenty-one (21) years to possess, transfer, transport or purchase marijuana, marijuana products, marijuana accessories. B. It is unlawful for any person to display, consume, sell, or use marijuana in or upon any public area, public park, or public building. C. It is unlawful for any person to purchase marijuana or marijuana products for consumption or possession by, or otherwise provide marijuana for consumption or possession by, or to sell marijuana to, any person under the age of twenty-one (21) years. 10.14.050 Smoking of marijuana in public - Prohibited. A. General Prohibition. The smoking of marijuana is prohibited anywhere the smoking of tobacco is prohibited. B. Smoking of marijuana shall be prohibited as stated in Health and Safety Code section 11362.3. 10.14.060 Penalties. A. General Penalty. In addition to any other penalties that may exist under state, federal, and local laws, a violation of any provision of this chapter or a failure to comply with any mandatory requirements of this chapter is subject to prosecution in accordance with Title 1 of the National City Municipal Code and may be enforced through injunctive relief or other relief available by law. Penalties for violations of the provisions of this chapter may result in a misdemeanor citation for each day in violation, punishable by a maximum of one year in jail and a one thousand dollar fine. B. Public Nuisance. The conduct of any activity or business in violation of this chapter is declared to be a public nuisance and the city may, in addition to all other remedies set forth hereunder, commence an action or actions or proceedings, for the abatement, removal and enjoinment thereof, in a manner provided by the law; and may take such other steps and may apply to such court or courts as may have jurisdiction to grant such relief as will abate or remove such marijuana cultivation facility, marijuana product manufacturing facility, marijuana testing facility, marijuana delivery business, marijuana storage facility, retail marijuana store, marijuana establishment, or any commercial marijuana activity and restrain and enjoin any person from operating, conducting or maintaining such a business or establishment contrary to the provisions of this chapter. Urgency Ordinance No. 2016 - 2414 4 Adding Chapter 10.14 to prohibit all October 18, 2016 commerical marijuana activity in National City 530 of 669 C. Cost Recovery. Administering departments are authorized to charge cost recovery fees for services provided under this chapter. Cost recovery fees may also be recovered for equipment and personnel expenses incurred. Said fees may be established from time to time by resolution of the city council. 10.14.070 Enforcement. The provisions of this chapter shall be enforced by the fire 7marshal, any police officer, any code compliance officer, and any other city official authorized to enforce any provision of the municipal code. 10.14.080 Non -exclusivity. Nothing in this chapter shall limit or preclude the enforcement of other applicable laws. 10.14.090 Severability. The provisions of this chapter are declared to be separate and severable. The invalidity of any clause, sentence, paragraph, subdivision, section, or portion of this chapter, or the invalidity of the application thereof to any person or circumstance shall not affect the validity of the remainder of this chapter, or the validity of its application to other persons or circumstances. PASSED and ADOPTED this 18th day of October, 2016. Ron Morrison, Mayor ATTEST: Michael R. Dalla, City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: George H. Eiser, III Interim City Attorney Urgency Ordinance No. 2016 - 2414 5 Adding Chapter 10.14 to prohibit all October 18, 2016 commerical marijuana activity in National City 531 of 669 Urgency Ordinance No. 2016 - 2414 6 Adding Chapter 10.14 to prohibit all October 18, 2016 commerical marijuana activity in National City 532 of 669 CC/CDC-HA Agenda 10/18/2016 — Page 533 The following page(s) contain the backup material for Agenda Item: An Ordinance of the City Council of the City of National City repealing Chapter 10.18 (Beekeeping) and adding Chapter 8.34 to Title 8 of the National City Municipal Code to allow for beekeeping in the City. (Applicant City -Initiated) (Case File 2016-05 A) 533 of 669 CITY OF NATIONAL CITY, CALIFORNIA COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT MEETING DATE: October 18, 2016 AGENDA ITEM NO. ITEM TITLE: An Ordinance of the City Council of the City of National City repealing Chapter 10.18 (Beekeeping) and adding Chapter 8.34 to Title 8 of the National City Municipal Code to allow for beekeeping in the City. (Applicant City -Initiated) (Case File 2016-05 A) PREPARED BY: Martin Reeder, AICP 41(41 DEPARTMENT: PI PHONE: 619-336-4313 APPROVED BY: EXPLANATION: At the City Council of October 5, 2016, City Council introduced an Ordinance repealing Chapter 10.18 (Beekeeping) and adding Chapter 8.34 to Title 8 of the National City Municipal Code to allow for beekeeping in the City. As part of the introduction, staff was asked to add "Open Space" as one of the zones where beekeeping would be permitted. Only residential and institutional zones were previously included. The change is intended to allow institutions such as Stein Farm, which are not located in the Institutional zone, to also have the option to keep bees. The attached Ordinance contains the requested change. FINANCIAL STATEMENT: ACCOUNT NO. APPROVED: APPROVED: Finance MIS ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW: Exempt from CEQA under Class 7, Section 15307 — Actions by Regulatory Agencies for Protection of Natural Resources ORDINANCE: INTRODUCTION: FINAL ADOPTION: x STAFF RECOMMENDATION: BOARD / COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION: N/A ATTACHMENTS: Ordinance 1534 of 669 I ORDINANCE NO. 2016 — 2415 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY ON NATIONAL CITY REPEALING CHAPTER 10.18 (BEEKEEPING) AND ADDING CHAPTER 8.34 TO TITLE 8 OF THE NATIONAL CITY MUNICIPAL CODE TO ALLOW FOR BEEKEEPING IN THE CITY WHEREAS, pursuant to the terms and provisions of the Government Code of the State of California, proceedings were duly initiated for the amendment of the National City Municipal Code; and WHEREAS, at a previous City Council meeting, staff was asked to look into potentially allowing beekeeping within the City and to report back on the matter; and WHEREAS, at the March 15, 2016 City Council meeting, staff provided information related to the topic, including other San Diego County jurisdiction regulations, and possible Municipal Code changes; and WHEREAS, after considering the report, staff was directed to return with an ordinance to allow beekeeping in the City subject to a permit; and WHEREAS, the City Council recognizes that honeybees are critical to a successful ecosystem and to California agriculture in general; and WHEREAS, honeybees are traditionally considered part of agricultural food production (eggs, dairy, meat, and honey), and that beekeeping as a business or for pollination purposes is consistent with agricultural uses and animal husbandry in general, both of which are consistent with the General Plan and with the Land Use Code. NOW, THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of National City does ordain as follows: Section 1. All protests, if any, against said amendment to the Municipal Code and each of them be and hereby are denied and overruled. Section 2. Chapter 10.18 (Beekeeping) is hereby repealed in its entirety. Section 3. Chapter 8.34 is hereby added to Title 8 of the National City Municipal Code to read as follows: Chapter 8.34 BEEKEEPING Sections: 8.34.005 Purpose. 8.34.010 Definitions. 8.34.020 General provisions. 8.34.030 Enforcement and removal. 535 of 669 8.34.005 Purpose. A. Purpose. It is the purpose and intent of this division to provide for the safe and orderly keeping of bees in the City of National City by establishing certain minimum standards for the keeping of bees to protect the public health, safety, and welfare of the residents of the City of National City. 8.34.010 Definitions. "Beekeeper" means a person who raises bees. "Beekeeping or keeping of bees" means the owning and breeding bees for their honey and other products. "Docile bee(s)" means Apis mellifera species (honey bees). "Sensitive area(s)" means areas where people, including but not limited to the elderly, small children, individuals, persons with medical conditions, or confined animals that inhabit or frequent the area, that are more at a greater health risk than the general population if stinging incidents were to occur. Sensitive areas are characterized by a demonstrated need for a greater safety buffer. Sensitive areas include, but are not limited to, schools, playgrounds, picnic areas, outdoor sports facilities, daycare centers, senior care facilities, medical facilities, and animal boarding facilities. 8.34.020 General provisions. A. The keeping of bees shall not be allowed within the City, except as provided in this Chapter. It is unlawful to keep or maintain any bees or hive of or for bees within the territorial limits of the city, except as allowed in this Chapter. B. Beehives may be kept only on lots with a minimum area of 5,000 square feet within the Residential, Open Space, and Institutional zones subject to the following: 1. The beekeeper shall apply for a beekeeping permit. The permit application shall be filed on a form available from the Planning Department and shall be accompanied with a nonrefundable fee as established by resolution of the City Council. 2. Up to four beehives may be permitted on a parcel. 3. Beehives shall be placed at least twenty-five feet from the property line of the traveled way of any public streets or sidewalks closest to the parcel, at least twenty-five feet from any private access easement, at least fifteen feet from any side or rear lot line, and at least twenty-five feet from all on -site and neighboring dwellings. When three or four hives are kept or maintained on a parcel, no less than a one -hundred foot separation from the beehive(s) to the on -site dwellings, neighboring dwellings, or habitable structures shall be maintained. 4. Beekeepers shall keep sufficient open water available near the beehives during hot and dry weather in compliance with vector control regulations. 5. Beehives shall be well maintained at all times. 6. A beehive shall be no larger than 15 cubic feet in volume. 7. Only docile bee species may be permitted. 8. Registration with the County of San Diego Department of Agriculture, Weights, and Measures is required prior to any beekeeping activities and prior to applying for a bee keeping permit under this Chapter. 9. The following firefighting materials shall be maintained, in good working condition, at all times when the beehive is attended by the keeper, sufficiently near the beehive so as immediately to be available in case of fire: Beekeeping Ordinance 2 of 4 Ordinance No. 2016 - 2415 NCMC Chapter 8.34 October 18, 2016 536 of 669 a. A shovel; and b. Either a fire extinguisher of the two and one-half gallon water - under -pressure type or the five gallon back -pump type or its equivalent; or a garden hose connected to a source of water. 10. Beehives shall be placed no less than one -hundred feet from the property line of sensitive areas closest to the beehive(s). 8.34.030 Enforcement and removal. A. Public Nuisance. All violations of this Chapter are declared to constitute a public nuisance which may be abated by any method provided by law, judicial or administrative, and includes remedies provided in Title 1. B. Enforcement. Each day of violation or non-compliance with this Chapter shall be deemed as a new and separate offense and shall be subject to all the remedies and penalties available under the law and in accordance with Title 1 or as otherwise provided by local or state law. C. Summary Abatement —Imminent Safety Hazards. If any beehive is an immediate threat to the public health and safety by virtue of the physical condition of the beehive structure or by virtue of dangerous bee behavior as determined by the City Manager or his/her designee, said beehive may be immediately and summarily abated and removed. Costs incurred by the City in the abatement and removal of bees and/or beehives shall be assessed against the owner or any other Responsible Party in accordance with Title 1 and California Government Code Section 38773.1 or 38773.5. D. Notice of Violation. Whenever any beehive or part thereof, other than those causing an immediate threat to the public health and safety, constitutes an illegal beehive and/or is placed or maintained in violation of this Chapter, the City Manager or designee shall give written notice to all responsible parties to remove the beehive or to bring it into compliance. The notice shall specify the nature of the violation, and give directions for a cure, which may include complete removal or permitting by a specific date. The notice shall advise the permittee, owner, or person in charge of or responsible for the beehive of the hearing or appeal rights set forth in Title 1, if applicable. The date for removal specified in the written notice shall not be less than ten days from the date of the mailing of the notice. E. Removal of Uncured Violations. Whenever the responsible parties fail to comply with an order of the City Manager or designee made pursuant to this section, and the time for cure has elapsed without the cure being effected, the City Manager or designee may remove the beehive, or order it removed, either by the city's own force or by a private party under contract. The expense of the removal may be charged, jointly and severally, to any and all responsible parties. Such amount shall constitute a debt owed to the city. No permit shall thereafter be issued to any permittee, owner, person in charge, or other Responsible Party who fails to pay such costs. Any costs, including attorney's fees, incurred by the city in collection of the costs shall be added to the amount of the debt. F. Cumulative Remedies. Remedies set forth in this Chapter are not exclusive. Nothing in this Chapter shall preclude the city from enforcing the provisions of this Chapter by any other criminal, civil, or administrative proceeding. [Signature Page to Follow] Beekeeping Ordinance 3 of 4 Ordinance No. 2016 - 2415 NCMC Chapter 8.34 October 18, 2016 537 of 669 PASSED and ADOPTED this 18th day of October, 2015. ATTEST: Michael R. Dalla, City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: George H. Eiser, III Interim City Attorney Ron Morrison, Mayor Beekeeping Ordinance 4 of 4 Ordinance No. 2016 - 2415 NCMC Chapter 8.34 October 18, 2016 538 of 669 CC/CDC-HA Agenda 10/18/2016 — Page 539 The following page(s) contain the backup material for Agenda Item: Resolution of the City Council of the City of National City adopting amendments to the City Council Policy Manual; Chapter 100: Administration and Policy Management (Policy 109 - Expenses, 110 - Flags, 114 - Grants). (City Manager) 539 of 669 CITY OF NATIONAL CITY, CALIFORNIA COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT MEETING DATE: October 18, 2016 AGENDA ITEM NO. ITEM TITLE: Resolution of the City Council of the City of National City Adopting Amendments to the City Council Policy Manual; Chapter 100: Administration and Policy Management (Policy 109 - Expenses, 110- Flags, 114 - Grants). PREPARED BY: Lauren Maxilom, Management Analyst; EXPLANATION: As per Council Policy #101, the City Council Policy Manual should be reviewed on an annual basis, and updated as necessary. At this time Staff has reviewed Chapter 100 and proposes only the following changes which are presented for your adoption. 109: Reimbursement of Expenses Incurred in the Performance of Official Duties 110: Display of Flags 114: Grant Review Policy DEPARTMENT: Cityr ana e}r�s ffice `,, ` r APPROVED BY: ; Additional proposed amendments to City Council Policy Manual Chapters will be brought back at future meetings. FINANCIAL STATEMENT: ACCOUNT NO. nla. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW: 'n/ai ORDINANCE: INTRODUCTION: FINAL ADOPTION: APPROVED: APPROVED: Finance MIS STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Review and approve policy amendments as submitted BOARD / COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION: nia ATTACHMENTS: Policy 109 1) existing policy, 2) red -line strike out; proposed policy, 3) final draft Policy 110 1) existing policy, 2) red -line strike out; proposed policy, 3) final draft Policy 114 1) existing policy, 2) red -line strike out; proposed policy, 3) final draft 540 of 669 541 of 669 CITY COUNCIL POLICY CITY OF NATIONAL CITY TITLE: Reimbursement for Expenses Incurred in POLICY #109 The Performance of Official Duties ADOPTED: September 19, 2006 AMENDED: October 8, 2013 Purpose Government Code Sections 53232.2, 53233.3, and 53233.4, enacted pursuant to AB 1234, require the governing body of a local agency to adopt a written policy addressing reimbursement for travel and training expenses incurred in the performance of official duties. The City Council deems it desirable to adopt a uniform policy applicable to City employees, board and commission = members, members of the City Council and other elected officials, governing reimbursement for such expenses. . The purpose of this administrative policy is to establish uniform policies and procedures concerning expenses incurred by members of the City Council, board or commission members, City employees and,.other elected officials while traveling or attending events on City business. I. Policy A City Councilmember, elected official `_.board or commission member or City employee who is required to travel :in the performance of their duties or to attend an authorized meeting,_ conferenceor seminar which is of direct benefit to the City shall be reimbursed for reasonable'' expenses incurred, including transportation, meals, lodging and other:incidental expenses directly related to such official City business. Experises specifically disallowed for reimbursement include purchase of personal use items, alcoholic beverages and entertainment (including in -room movies). All requests for city -related travel must be reviewed/approved by the Purchasing Review Committee (PRC) prior to making any travel commitments or arrangements. Estimated cost information must be sent to the Finance Department/Purchasing Division. Upon approval by the PRC, travel plans may be made. PRC approval numbers must be noted on expense reports and invoices submitted for payment or reimbursement. Existing City purchasing policies and procedures must be followed when obtaining cost estimates, and making arrangements associated with travel. See Municipal Code, Chapter 2.60 regarding Purchasing polices and procedures. Page 1 of 542 of 669 TITLE: Reimbursement for Expenses Incurred in POLICY 4109 The Performance of Official Duties ADOPTED: September 19, 2006 AMENDED: October 8, 2013 A. Transportation. The following modes of transportation may be allowed for the purpose of traveling on City business: 1. Air Travel. Allowance for air travel will be actual roundtrip via coach or tourist class accommodation. Receipts for air passage must be retained for submission with the Travel Expense Report. 2. Personal car. With specific approval froni the department head or the City Manager, personal cars may be used for out-of-town travel. Reimbursement shall be based on actual mileage used for the official travel, Any mileage used for personal purposes or otherwise not directly related to official City business shall be deducted from total miles traveled to arrive at the net reimbursable mileage. Reimbursement shall be at the prevailing IRS standard mileage rate. When use of a personal vehicle is authorized, individuals -shall adequately account for their use of the personal vehicle on a daily basis on the Travel Expense Report. Total reimbursable transportation expense through use of a personal car shall in no case exceed the allowable expense of transportation by air when one is available to such destination. __ 3. __.City -owned vehicle, .::= Use of City -owned vehicle shall be authorized when this mode" -_ of transportation can be demonstrated as the most economical means available. Fox determining advisability of usage, employees shall be supplied u th estimated cost of travel via a City -owned vehicle by Public Works upon request. Use of a City -owned vehicle shall not be authorized when the estimated cost exceeds the authorized cost of air travel. When use --of a City -owned vehicle is authorized, individuals shall adequately account for their useof the City -owned vehicle on a daily basis in the Travel Expense Report. Individuals= -shall be charged at the prevailing IRS standard mileage rate for every mile of personal use ;of the City -owned vehicle. The cost of personal use of a City -owned vehicle shall be deducted from the total allowable travel expenses. Individuals who experience car trouble with a City -owned vehicle while on out-of- town travel, should contact the Public Works Department as soon as possible for direction. If it is after work hours or on the weekend, contact the Police Department Dispatch at (619) 336-4411, and they will get in touch with Public Works staff. All receipts for such repairs must be pre -authorized by Public Works and retained and forwarded to Public Works for approval prior to reimbursement. In the event of an accident while using a City -owned vehicle, the traveler should refer to the `Accident Page 2of8 543 of 669 TITLE: Reimbursement for Expenses Incurred in POLICY #109 The Performance of Official Duties ADOPTED: September 19, 2006 AMENDED: October 8, 2013 Packet' in the glove box of each vehicle for detailed instructions on how to proceed, then notify Police Dispatch and Public Works immediately. B. Lodging. 1. General provisions. Reimbursement will be.made for the cost of lodging required to conduct the assigned City business. Dated receipts and meeting and travel schedules must be retained for submission with the Travel Expense Report. Lodging will be allowed for the night prior to the commencement of the meeting if the time set for the start of the meeting requires the individual to leave home prior to 6 a.m. of the day of the meeting. Lodging will be allowed for the_night following the meeting if the employee could not have arrived home prior to 12:00 midnight following the meeting. Lodging in connection with separate:: consecutive meetings or conferences shall be permitted if it is less costly than returnig.to the city_ for the nights between the meetings. In instances where an individual has the option =to travel by air and the individual opted to travel by car, reimbursement for lodging shall be allowed on the same basis as if the individual traveled by air. 2. Rate of reimbursement. Lodging reimbursement shall be based on the single morn rate charged at the headquarters hotel for the conference or the hotel most proximate to -the; site of the meeting. If the hotel has different rates for single room accommodation, tl eindividual shall be entitled to reimbursement for no more than_ the second least expensive rate. In the event the individual occupies a more expensive room accommodation (e.g. multiple occupancy), they will be reimbursed at the rate for single occupancy. The employee shall have the hotel indicate on the bill whether _the roont-is for single or multiple occupancy and the equivalent single occupancy rate.f the accommodation is other than single occupancy. If the rate for single occupancy cannot be verified from the bill or receipt, the individual shall be reimbursed at 80% of the rate indicated on the bill. C. Meals. Reimbursement for meals shall be on the basis of actual cost. All meal receipts must be retained for submission with the Travel Expense Report. Receipts must be detailed and itemized showing exactly what was ordered. Credit card receipts will not be accepted for purposes of reimbursement. To claim reimbursement, travel commencement and termination times must be accounted for. Reimbursement for breakfast is not allowed on the day of departure Page 3 of 8 544 of 669 TITLE: Reimbursement for Expenses Incurred in POLICY #109 The Performance of Official Duties ADOPTED: September 19, 2006 AMENDED: October 8, 2013 unless the trip starts prior to 7:00 a.m. Reimbursement for dinner is not allowed on the day of return unless the trip ends later than 8:00 p.m. D. Registration Fees. Fees charged for registration at a conference or meeting which- an individual is authorized to attend are reimbursable. Receipts or other acceptable evidence of the amount of the fees, such as a copy of the conference program/invitation setting forth the fee rates, shall be retained for submission with the claim form::;_ E. Incidental Expenses. 1. Taxi and Bus Fares. Reimbursement will be allowed for taxi, bus fare or other transportation costs when such transportation is necessary in the conduct of City business. Receipts must be provided for these expenses, regardless of cost. Such expenses shall be itemized on the _Travel Expense Report. 2. Communications. Telephone and telegraph charges will be reimbursed for official calls and --wires only. Unofficial calls charged to the hotel bill should be identified and deducted from the total hotel bill. 3. Parking, garage, and- toll charges. Parking, garage, and toll expenses will be rei bursed when an automobile is used for transportation. Receipts must be submitted for reimbursement. =4 = Tips,_ gratuities, and services fees. Customary tips of up to 20 percent will be permitted on reimbursable items. Tips shall be itemized on the claim form. 5. Miscellaneous. All items of expense not included in any of the other categories -,but which nonetheless can be clearly identified as incidental to the undertaking of City business shall also be allowed reimbursement. Receipts for these items must be submitted. Examples of such expenses are public stenographer fees, duplicating expenses and the cost of publications of value to the City being distributed at conference. F. P.O.S.T. Expenses. Expenditures in training Police Department personnel under the P.O.S.T. Program shall be authorized and reimbursed by the City in accordance with established P.O.S.T. guidelines. In case of conflict between the P.O.S.T. guidelines and this policy, the P.O.S.T. guidelines shall prevail but only in the case of expenditures properly reimbursable under the P.O.S.T. Reimbursement Program. Page 4 of 8 545 of 669 TITLE: Reimbursement for Expenses Incurred in POLICY #109 The Performance of Official Duties ADOPTED: September 19, 2006 AMENDED: October 8, 2013 G. Cash Advance. It is encouraged that individuals use their own money or credit cards to finance the trip and then claim reimbursement upon their return. If in the judgment of a department manager, estimated expenses for a contemplated out -of -city travel are too high to expect the individual to finance the trip and be reimbursed upon their return, the department manager may authorize advance payment or a maximum of $200 to the employee. An advance in excess of $200 -must have the approval of the City Manager. - Approval of cash advance does not constitute approval for expenditure of the amount so advanced. All actual expenditures must be justified and approved based on limits and allowances set by this policy. II. Procedures A. Reimbursement of Business Travel Expenses. The individual shall submit a signed Travel Expense Report to the department director after completion of travel, -Suchreport shall show the details of official business expenses incurred and should be accompanied by supporting documents required under this policy:: - The department director shall review the report for compliance with this policy and affix' their signature to signify approval. The Travel Expense Report must be forwarded to the Finance Department within three (3) working days =upon_ return. City Council members and members of boards and commission shall submit -'the Travel Expense Report to the City Manager for approval. B. Air. Allowance for. -air travel will be actual round trip via coach or tourist class accommodation. Travel Expense Reports will be accompanied by air passage receipts when filed. C. Personal Car. Individuals shall account for use of their vehicle on a daily basis through use of a Travel Expense Report, which is to be submitted when filing a claim. D. City -owned Vehicle. Page 5 of 8 546 of 669 TITLE: Reimbursement for Expenses Incurred in POLICY #109 The Performance of Official Duties ADOPTED: September 19, 2006 AMENDED: October 8, 2013 Authorized personal use of a City vehicle will be accounted for on a Travel Expense Report, which will be submitted when filing for reimbursement. Individuals will be charged the prevailing IRS standard mileage rate for each mile, and shall be deducted from the total allowable travel expenses. Emergency repair receipts must be submitted to Public Works for approval prior to reimbursement. E. Lodging. Receipts indicating date and occupancy status, accompanied by. meeting and travel schedules much be submitted with the Travel Expense Report:when filing a claim. F. Meals All meal receipts will be submitted with the Travel Expense: Report. Receipts must be detailed and itemized, showing exactly- what was purchased (not just credit card receipts). G. Registration Fees. Receipts, or other acceptable evidence-- of the amount paid, must be submitted with the Travel Expense Report. H. hic dental Expenses. Incidental expenses (except for alcohol, entertainment, and items for personal use) shall be itemized on the Travel Expense Report, and receipts shall be provided. I. _Cash Advance. Approved requests for travel advances shall be submitted to the Finance Department at least ten (10) working days before the start of travel. Funds will be released no earlier than three (3) working days prior to the trip departure date. The Finance Department shall deduct from the total expenses claimed, any expense item found to be inconsistent with this policy, and shall furnish the employee with an itemized list of items disallowed. Any amount due the employee shall be paid within ten (10) working days from receipt by the Finance Department of the Travel Expense Report. Page 6 of 8 547 of 669 TITLE: Reimbursement for Expenses Incurred in POLICY #109 The Performance of Official Duties ADOPTED: September 19, 2006 AMENDED: October 8, 2013 III. Alternative Proof of Payment for Training Expenses. A. Individuals periodically request alternative proof of payment methods for reimbursable training expenses, (i.e., registration/tuition fees), advanced, when receipts or cancelled checks are not available. B. As an exception, only when receipts are impractical to obtain, the following may be used in place of receipts or cancelled checks for reimbursement purposes. 1. Course announcement specifying the amount of fees, and 2. A document issued by the training institution indicating attendance or completion of the course by the employee - IV. Use of City Credit Card for Travel Purposes.. City staff members occasionally attend `job -related training and conferences, upon approval of the City's Purchasing Review Committee (PRC). Job related training is often required by state mandates. In order to make airline and hotel reservations, a credit card number must be provided to. guarantee the reservations. Prior to use, any employee wishing to use ,a City -issued credit card, must read and adhere to the City's Credit Card Policy (Administrative Policy #3.14). Per Administrative Policy #3.14:_7: __Credit cards may never be used to circumvent established -Competitive purchasing procedures, or dollar limits established by the City' s Municipal Code, City;,Ordinances or Purchasing Division procedures. Credit cards -shall only be used to pay for "PRC" authorized travel and training expenses. Individuals may not use City credit cards for personal expenses even if the intent is to reimburse the City later. See Administrative Policy 3.14 for complete rules and details. Summary This Policy cannot cover every issue, exception or contingency that may arise in obtaining reimbursement for travel and training expenses incurred in the performance of official duties, and in the use of City credit cards. Individuals are expected to exercise good judgment and show proper regard for economy when traveling in conjunction with official City business. Any expense for which an individual requests reimbursement should directly and manifestly relate to the conduct of City business and, in the event of an audit, should leave no doubt that Page 7 of 8 548 of 669 TITLE: Reimbursement for Expenses Incurred in POLICY #109 The Performance of Official Duties ADOPTED: September 19, 2006 AMENDED: October 8, 2013 such expenditure was pre -approved by the Purchasing Review Committee, and is in fact reasonable and necessary in the conduct of City business. Accordingly, the basic standard that should always prevail is to use common sense and good judgment in the use and stewardship of City resources. This Policy shall supersede all previously -adopted policies and procedures pertaining to reimbursement for travel and training expenses and to the use of City credit cards, including Instruction Nos. 3.03, 3.04, 3.05 and 3.14 of the City Administrative Manual. This Policy satisfies the requirements of Government Code Sections 53232,2 and 53233.3. Related Policy References Government Code Sections: 53232.2, 53233.3, 53233.4 Assembly Bill 1234 City Administrative Manual Policies 3.03, 3.04, 3.05, 3.14 Municipal Code, Chapter 2.60 Forms: Travel Expense Report: available from the Finance Department or the City's Intranet site. - Credit Cardholder-. Use Agreement: available from the Finance Department Prior Policy Amendments September 19,-2006 Page 8 of 8 549 of 669 CITY COUNCIL POLICY CITY OF NATIONAL CITY TITLE: Reimbursement for Expenses Incurred in POLICY #109 The Performance of Official Duties ADOPTED: September 19, 2006 AMENDED: October 8, 2013 Purpose Government Code Sections 53232.2, 53233.3-53232.3 and 53233.153232.4 enacted pursuant to AB 1234, require the governing body of a local agency to adopt a written policy addressing reimbursement for travel and training expenses incurred in the performance of official duties. The City Council deems it desirable to adopt a uniform policy applicable to City employees, board and commission members, members of the City Council and other elected officials, governing reimbursement for such expenses. The purpose of this administrative policy is to establish uniform policies and procedures concerning expenses incurred by members of the City Council, board or commission members, and City employees while traveling or attending events on City business. Policy A City Council member, elected official, board or commission member or City employee who is required to travel in the performance of their duties or to attend an authorized meeting, conference or seminar which is of direct benefit to the City shall be reimbursed for reasonable expenses incurred, including transportation, meals, lodging and other incidental expenses directly related to such official City business. Expenses specifically disallowed for reimbursement include purchase of personal use items, alcoholic beverages and entertainment (including in -room movies). All requests for city -related travel must be reviewed/approved by the Purchasing Review Committee (PRC) prior to making any travel commitments or arrangements. Estimated cost information must be sent to the Finance Department/Purchasing Division. Upon approval by the PRC, travel plans may be made. PRC approval numbers must be noted on expense reports and invoices submitted for payment or reimbursement. Existing City purchasing policies and procedures must be followed when obtaining cost estimates, and making arrangements associated with travel. See Municipal Code, Chapter 2.60 regarding Purchasing polices and procedures. A. Transportation. Page 1 of 9 550 of 669 CITY COUNCIL POLICY CITY OF NATIONAL CITY The following modes of transportation may be allowed for the purpose of traveling on City business: l . Air Travel. Allowance for air tra%e1 will be- t. a'. r, .::dt,;,, . -a conab, or —tourist c1a:f ac subii.r:inn with the T Air travel shall be authorized and reimbursed atthelowest fare class offered by the airline. other than the lowest possible fare class may be authorized when bona fide. business related. scheduling restrictions do not permit use of the lowest possible fare. Individuals opting for a higher fare class for their personal convenience shall be required to pay the difference between the lowest fare class and the option selected. The individual, or authorized designee, shall attempt to book air travel as to take advantage of discounts offered for purchasing flight tickets m advance of departure; i.e. 14 or 21 days, and take advantage of non-refundable ticket fares where practical. Receipts for air passage must be retained for submission with the expense report. 2. Personal +Vehicle. With specific approval from the department head director or the City Manager, personal cars may be used for out-of-town travel. Reimbursement shall be based on actual mileage used for the official travel. Any mileage used for personal purposes or otherwise not directly related to official City business shall be deducted from total miles traveled to arrive at the net reimbursable mileage. Reimbursement shall be at the prevailing IRS standard mileage rate. When use of a personal vehicle is authorized, individuals shall adequately account for their use of the personal vehicle on a daily basis on the Travel Expense Report. Total reimbursable transportation expense through use of a personal car shall in no case exceed the allowable expense of transportation by air when one is available to such destination. Individuals receiYinia compensation in lieu of an auto allowance shall be eligible for mileage reimbursement for travel beyond the county limits. 3. City -owned le /chicle. Use of City -owned vehicle shall be authorized when this mode of transportation can be demonstrated as the most economical means available. For determining advisability of usage, eitaployees individuals shall be supplied with estimated cost of travel via a City -owned vehicle by Public Works upon request. Use of a City -owned vehicle shall not be authorized when the estimated cost exceeds the authorized cost of air travel and associated expenses Ii.e. taxis and shuttles). When use of a City -owned vehicle is authorized, individuals shall adequately account for their use of the City -owned vehicle on a daily basis in the Travel Expense Report. Individuals shall be charged at the prevailing IRS standard mileage rate for every mile of personal use of the City -owned vehicle. The cost of personal use of a City -owned vehicle shall be deducted from the total allowable travel expenses. Page 2 of 9 f Formatted: Indent: Lett: 0', First line: 0' 551 of 669 CITY COUNCIL POLICY CITY OF NATIONAL CITY Individuals who expo ienee rouble with a City oweca • o' icic while .. out of town t is after work hours or on the weekend, contact the Police Department Dispatch at (619) 36 111l; and -they will get in touch with Public' prk°, s•,"f ^ licccipta for such repair,, most -be -retained ^.gym dcd P- Works for approval prior to rei„ scmcnt. In the -event of ari-ac-cent-while using a Cit'}-ewncd vchiclor e-treveler should refer to the Amideni Parke: in the clove box of e .chicle fo d toiled in .ra -,ow to pr0eeed; t1 1 Individuals should contact the Public Works Equipment Maintenance Supervisor immediately for direction should the City -owned vehicle become inoperable or otherwise unsafe to drive. If the Equipment Maintenance Supervisor authorizes repairs requiring an out of pocket payment, all receipts for such repairs must be retained and forwarded to Public Works for approval prior to reimbursement. Anyone that is unable to pay for the cost of emeraencvrepairs shall notify his/her supervisor and the Public Works Department immediately to make other arrangements. Individuals using a city -owned vehicle outside of normal business hours must be sure to --- have the Equipment Maintenance Supervisors after-hours telephone number in case an emergency occurs outside of normal business hours. 4. Rail. Travel by rail rimy be authorized when the cost of the rail transportation and other associated expenses (i.e. buses. shuttles. taxis hotel stays_ muds. etc.) is less than or equal to the cost including associated a xpense, of air or automobile {personal orCit)-ownedelricle) travel_ B. Lodging. 1. General provisions. Reimbursement will be made for the cost of lodging required to conduct the assigned City business. Dated receipts and meeting and travel schedules must be retained for submission with the Travel Expense Report. Lodging will be allowed for the night prior to the commencement of the meeting if the time set for the start of the meeting requires the individual to leave home prior to 6 asn. of the day of the meeting. Lodging will be allowed for the night following the meeting if the en ivee--individual could not have arrived home prior to 12:00 midnight following the meeting. Lodging in connection with separate, consecutive meetings or conferences shall be permitted if it is less costly than returning to the city for the nights between the meetings. In instances where an individual has the option to travel by air and the individual opted to travel by car, reimbursement for lodging shall be allowed on the same basis as if the individual traveled by air. Page 3 of 9 1 Formatted: Indent: Left: 0.13", Right: 0", Tab stops: 2.4", I Left J 552 of 669 CITY COUNCIL POLICY CITY OF NATIONAL CITY 2. Rate of rennborsementRei,nbursement. Lodging reimbursement shall be based on the single -standard room rate charged at the headquarters hotel for the conference or the hotel most proximate to the site of the meeting. if the hotel ha; different rates fer sink, room accommodation, the inditiiatral�l ll t rei u re -than the second least expensive rate. In the event the individual occupies a more expensive room accommodation (e.g. multiple oc-eupanc-ya suite), they -s/he will be reimbursed at the standard room rate-f leeery. employee shall 1 ave the-hote, ndiate ,,._ u' f , t tipple -gee t c g c .€the-aceemmedution-i y. If tl,e-rate. f g,. , .,:moo .tie:11-er-rec reimbursed at 80%of-the-to nd. rated the Wit, tti-�it r bill. C. Meals. Allowable meals include breakfast, lunch andior dinner meeting the criteria established below. Reimbursement for meals shall be allowable when travel on official business reasonably requires an overnight stay or when the purchase of a meal(s) is a required component of the conference. meeting or training. Reimbursement shall be on the basis of actual cost when the meal(s) is a component of the conference_ meeting or training with proper documentation. Al] other meals will be reimbursed, up to a maximum allowance not to exceed the daily meal allowance established by the U.S. Department of Genera] Services Administration (GSA) for breakfast, hutch and dinner for the location of the travel. For information regarding the current GSA standard daily meal allowance rate, please contact the Finance Director. Itemized receipts from the dining establishment must be retained for submission with the expense report. Other forms of documentation or receipts that are not itemized may be accepted at the discretion of the City Manager or designee_ In claiming reimbursement, time of commencement and termination of travel need to be accounted for, Reimbursement for breakfast is not allowed on the day of depamirc unless the trip starts prior to 7:00 a.m. Reimbursement for dinner is not allowed on the day of return unless the trip ends later than 7:00 p.m_ Reimbursement is not allowed for meals purchased in lieu of a meal(,) included in the fee for the conference. meeting or training unless sonroved by the City Manager or designee_ Refflib. , all he on the basis of actual cost All Heal rcemor rrta.Lt be Teta --with the Travel EX-p n e Rep , e demand ized ho :i xaerly what was ordered. Credit-e-ard=reeeipt —iot be acoej tut for pufge esef-re, r ;en Tf. claim reimbu=, errant, travel- m,.- en emont a ,dlei in ;, .:me -be ac-coentc-for. Re rberseruc t-€or-brea-Idast--is-net-alloy --arm-tote--dad-e€-depar-tfe Page 4 of 9 553 of 669 CITY COUNCIL POLICY CITY OF NATIONAL CITY unlcs.s the trip starts t% day-ef-feturn unless the -trip eoMs' ; ii- G D. Registration Fees. Fees charged for registration at a conference or meeting which an individual is authorized to attend are reimbursable. Receipts or other acceptable evidence of the amount of the fees, such as a copy of the conference program/invitation setting forth the fee rates, shall be retained for submission with the claim form. E. Incidental Expenses. 1. Taxi and Bus Fares. Reimbursement will be allowed for taxi, bus fare or other transportation costs when such transportation is necessary in the conduct of City business. Receipts -must -he -provided tor these expence3,-regardless of cost.No receipts need be provided for such expenses, except for individual charges exceeding $10.00.Such expenses shall be itemized on the Travel Expense Report. 2. Communications. Telephone,. and te!co p ;-ehar-ge-sfax and interne charges will be reimbursed for official calls and wires only. Unofficial calls charged to the hotel bill should be identified and deducted from the total hotel bill. Individuals that have been issued a City -owned cellular phone, laptop, tablet or other communication device shall use such devices in the conduct of business whenever feasible. 3. Parking, garageGarag_e, and tell —Toll e13argesCharges. Parking, garage, and toll expenses will be reimbursed when an automobile is used for transportation. Parking and garage charges will be reimbursed based on the lowest available rate. Valet and preferred or VIP parking/garage rates shall not be allowable unless there is no other option at or within a reasonable proxinity to the travel destination. 4. Airport Parking. Expenses for parking a City or personal vehicle at the airport are reimbursable based on receipts. However, airport parking expenses shall be limited to the rates for long-term parking when travel requires parking in excess of 24 hours. When an air sort shuttle is used in lieu of personal vehicle: the cost will he reimbursed as Well. 45. Tips, gratuitiesGratuities, and set.viees—Services feesFees. Customary tips of up to 24.15 percent will be permitted on reimbursable items. Tips shall be itemized on the claim form. 56. Miscellaneous. All items of expense not included in any of the other categories but which nonetheless can be clearly identified as incidental to the undertaking of city business shall also be allowed reimbursement. Receipts for these items must be submitted. Examples of such expenses are guubii.> tenths ices, Page 5 of 9 Formatted: Indent: Left: 0", First line: 0" 1 Formatted: Indent: Left: 0.19", First line: 0.81' 554 of 669 CITY COUNCIL POLICY CITY OF NATIONAL CITY duplicating expenses and the cost of publications of value to the city being distributed at conferences or meetings. F. P.O.S.T. Expenses. Expenditures in training Police Department personnel under the P.O.S.T. Program shall be authorized and reimbursed by the City in accordance with established P,O,S.T. guidelines. In case of conflict between the P.O.S.T. guidelines and this policy, the P.O.S.T. guidelines shall prevail but only in the case of expenditures properly reimbursable under the P.O.S.T_ Reimbursement Program. Should the P.O. S.T. reimbursement be insufficient to cover the actual cost of meals andior lodging, the City will pay the cost of the difference provided all other travel and meetiag expense guidelines outlined in this policy are followed. G. Per Diem aid Cash Advance. It is encouraged that individuals use their own money or credit cards to finance the trip and then claim reimbursement upon their return. If in the judgment of a department managerdirector, estimated expenses for a contemplated out -of -city travel are too high to expect the individual to finance the trip and be reimbursed upon theif-hisher return, the department manager -director may authorize advance payment er-a-±anximem-444200-te-the-empleAeeecif a per diem for meals The amount of the per diem shall be equal to the GSA per diem for breakfast lunch and dinner for each required meal based on the duration of the travel consistent with the guidelines established by this policy. Upon return the employee shall p vide receipts for all meals and return any excess funds. An-aelvaneeM e o f-S24A ;a t have-the-dpprovell-e -the City Manager, The department director may authorize payment of a maximum of S2OO to the indhidual for uth er related travel expenses. An advance in excess of . 200 must have the approva I. of the City Manager or designee. Approval of cash advance does not constitute approval for expenditure of the amount so advanced. Al] actual expenditures must be justified and approved based on limits and allowances set by this policy. II. Procedures A. Reimbursement of Business Travel Expenses. The individual shall submit a signed Travel Expense Report to the department director after completion of travel. Such report shall show the details of official business expenses incurred and should be accompanied by supporting documents required under this policy. The department director shall review the report for compliance with this policy and affix their signature to signify approval. The Travel Expense Report must be forwarded to the Finance Department within three (3) working days upon return. Page 6 of 9 555 of 669 CITY COUNCIL POLICY CITY OF NATIONAL CITY City Council members and members of boards and commission shall submit the Travel Expense Report to the City Manager for approval. B. Air. Allowance for air travel will be actual round trip via coat h—_r-- outict class acvatrm3odatienthe lowest possiblc fare. Travel Expense Reports will be accompanied by air passage receipts when filed. C. Personal CarVehicle_ Individuals shall account for use of their vehicle on a daily basis through use of a Travel Expense Report, which is to be submitted when filing a claim. D. City -owned Vehicle, Authorized personal use of a City vehicle will be accounted for on a Travel Expense Report, which will be submitted when filing for reimbursement. Individuals will be charged the prevailing 1RS standard mileage rate for each mile, and shall be deducted from the total allowable travel expenses. Emergency repair receipts must be submitted to Public Works for approval prior to reimbursement. E. Lodging. Receipts indicating date -arid occirpantatus, accompanied by meeting and travel schedules much be submitted with the Travel Expense Report when filing a claim. F. Meals All meal receipts will be submitted with the Travel Expense Report. Receipts must be detailed and itemized, showing exactly what was purchased (not just credit card receipts). G. Registration Fees. Receipts, or other acceptable evidence of the amount paid, must be submitted with the Travel Expense Report. H. Incidental Expenses. Incidental expenses (except for alcohol, entertainment, and items for personal use) shall be itemized on the Travel Expense Report, and receipts shall be provided when appropriate and possible. I. Cash Advance. Page 7 of 9 556 of 669 CITY COUNCIL POLICY CITY OF NATIONAL CITY Approved requests for travel advances (submitted on a Request for Warrant Form — see Administrative Policy 03.06) shall be submitted to the Finance Department at least ten (10) working days before the start of travel. Funds will be released no earlier than three (3) working days prior to the trip departure date. The Finance Department shall deduct from the total expenses claimed, any expense item found to be inconsistent with this policy, and shall furnish the employee -individual with an itemized list of items disallowed. Any amount due the ee}pleyee-individual shall be paid within ten (10) working days from receipt by the Finance Department of the Travel Expense Report. III. Alternative Proof of Payment for Training Expenses. A. Individuals periodically request alternative proof of payment methods for reimbursable training expenses, (i.e., registration/tuition fees), advanced, when receipts or cancelled checks are not available. B. As an exception, only when receipts are impractical to obtain, the following may be used in place of receipts or cancelled checks for reimbursement purposes. 1. Course announcement specifying the amount of fees, and 2. A document issued by the training institution indicating attendance or completion of the course by the employee -individual_ IV. Use of City Credit Card for Travel Purposes. City staff members occasionally attend job -related training and conferences, upon approval of the City's Purchasing Review Committee. Job -related training is often required by state mandates. In order to make airline and hotel reservations, a credit card number must be provided to guarantee the reservations. Prior to use, anyemployee-individual wishing to use a City -issued credit card, must read and adhere to the City's Credit Card Policy (Administrative Policy 403.14), Per Administrative Policy 003.14: Credit cards may never be used to circumvent established competitive purchasing procedures, or dollar limits established by the City's Municipal Code, City Ordinances or Purchasing Division procedures. Credit cards shall only be used to pay for "PRC" authorized travel and training expenses. Individuals may not use City credit cards for personal expenses even if the intent is to reimburse the City later. See Administrative Policy 03.14 for complete rules and details. Summary Page 8 of 9 557 of 669 CITY COUNCIL POLICY CITY OF NATIONAL CITY This Policy cannot cover every issue, exception or contingency that may arise in obtaining reimbursement for travel and training expenses incurred in the performance of official duties, and in the use of City credit cards. Individuals are expected to exercise good judgment and show proper regard for economy when traveling in conjunction with official City business. Any expense for which an individual requests reimbursement should directly and manifestly relate to the conduct of City business and, in the event of an audit, should leave no doubt that such expenditure was pre -approved by the Purchasing Review Committee, and is in fact reasonable and necessary in the conduct of City business. Accordingly, the basic standard that should always prevail is to use common sense and good judgment in the use and stewardship of City resources. This Policy shall supersede all previously -adopted policies and procedures pertaining to reimbursement for travel and training expenses and to the use of City credit cards, including 1n a Administrative Policies 03.03, 03.04, 03.05 and 03.14 of the City Administrative Manual. This Policy satisfies the requiie,uents of Government Code Sections 53232.2 and 5-3233 3.53232.3. Related Policy References Government Code Sections: 53232.2, 53233353232.3 53233.'153232.4 Assembly Bill 1234 City Administrative Manual Policies 03.03, 03.04, 03.05, 03.14 Municipal Code, Chapter 2.60 Forms: Travel Expense Report: available from the Finance Department or the City's Intranet site. Credit Cardholder Use Agreement: available from the Finance Department Prior Policy Amendments September 19, 2006 October 8. 2013 Page 9 of 9 558 of 669 CITY COUNCIL POLICY CITY OF NATIONAL CITY TITLE: Reimbursement for Expenses Incurred in POLICY #109 The Performance of Official Duties ADOPTED: September 19, 2006 AMENDED: October 8, 2013 Purpose Government Code Sections 53232.2, 53232.3, and 53232.4, enacted pursuant to AB 1234, require the governing body of a local agency to adopt a written policy addressing reimbursement for travel and training expenses incurred in the performance of official duties. The City Council deems it desirable to adopt a uniform policy applicable to City employees, board and commission members, members of the City Council and other elected officials, governing reimbursement for such expenses.. The purpose of this administrative policy is to establish uniform policies and procedures concerning expenses incurred by members of the City Council, board or commission members, and City employees while traveling or attending events on City business. Policy A City Council member, elected official, board or commission member or City employee who is required to travel in the performance -of their duties or to attend an authorized meeting, conference or seminarwhichis of direct benefit to the City shall be reimbursed for reasonableexpensesincurred, including transportation, meals, lodging and other incidental expenses directly related to such official City business. Expenses specifically= disallowed for reimbursement include purchase of personal use items, alcoholic beverages and entertainment (including in -room movies). All requests for city -related travel must be,reviewed/approved by the Purchasing Review Committee. (PRC) prior to making any travel commitments or arrangements. Estimated cost infarination must be sent to the Finance DepartmentfPurchasing Division. 'Upon approval by the PRC, travel plans may be made. PRC approval numbers must be noted on expense reports and invoices submitted for payment or reimbursement. Existing City purchasing policies and procedures must be followed when obtaining cost estimates, and making arrangements associated with travel. See Municipal Code, Chapter 2.60 regarding Purchasing polices and procedures. A. Transportation. The following modes of transportation may be allowed for the purpose of traveling on City business: 1. Air Travel, Air travel shall be authorized and reimbursed at the lowest fare class offered by the airline. Other than the lowest possible fare class may be Page 1 of 8 559 of 669 CITY COUNCIL POLICY CITY OF NATIONAL CITY authorized when bona fide, business related, scheduling restrictions do not permit use of the lowest possible fare. Individuals opting for a higher fare class for their personal convenience shall be required to pay the difference between the lowest fare class and the option selected. The individual, or authorized designee, shall attempt to book air travel as to take advantage of discounts offered for purchasing flight tickets in advance of departure; i.e. 14 or 21 days, and take advantage of non-refundable ticket fares where practical. Receipts for air passage must be retained for submission with the expense report. 2. Personal Vehicle. With specific approval from the department director or the City Manager, personal cars may be used for out-of-town travel. Reimbursement shall be based on actual mileage used for the official travel. Any mileage used for personal purposes or otherwise not directly related to official City business shall be deducted from total miles traveled to arrive at the net reimbursable mileage. - Reimbursement shall be at the prevailing IRS standard mileage rate. When use of a personal vehicle is authorized, individuals shall_ adequately account for their use of the personal vehicle ona daily basis on the Travel Expense Report. Total reimbursable transportation expense through use of a.personal car shall in no case exceed the allowable expense of transportation by air when one is available to such destination. Individuals receiving compensation in lieu of:an auto allowance shall be eligible for mileage reimbursement for travel beyond the county limits. 3.- City -owned Vehicle. Use of City -owned vehicle shall be authorized when this mode of transportation can be demonstrated as the most economical means available. For determining advisability of usage, individuals shall be supplied with estimated cost of travel via a City -owned vehicle by Public Works upon request. Use of a City -owned vehicle shall not be authorized when the estimated cost exceeds the authorized cost of air travel and associated expenses (i.e. taxis and shuttles). When use of a City -owned vehicle is authorized, individuals shall adequately account for their use of the City -owned vehicle on a daily basis in the Travel Expense Report. Individuals shall be charged at the prevailing IRS standard mileage rate for every mile of personal use of the City -owned vehicle. The cost of personal use of a City -owned vehicle shall be deducted from the total allowable travel expenses. Individuals should contact the Public Works Equipment Maintenance Supervisor immediately for direction should the City -owned vehicle become inoperable or otherwise unsafe to drive. If the Equipment Maintenance Supervisor authorizes repairs requiring an out of pocket payment, all receipts for such repairs must be retained and forwarded to Public Works for approval prior to reimbursement. Anyone that is unable to pay for the cost of emergency repairs shall notify his/her supervisor and the Public Works Department immediately to make other arrangements. Page 2 of 8 560 of 669 CITY COUNCIL POLICY CITY OF NATIONAL CITY Individuals using a city -owned vehicle outside of normal business hours must be sure to have the Equipment Maintenance Supervisor's after-hours telephone number in case an emergency occurs outside of normal business hours. 4. Rail. Travel by rail may be authorized when the cost of the rail transportation and other associated expenses (i.e. buses, shuttles, taxis, hotel stays, meals, etc.) is less than or equal to the cost, including associated expenses, of air or automobile (personal or City -owned vehicle) travel. B. Lodging. 1. General provisions. Reimbursement will be made for the cost of lodging required to conduct the assigned City business. Dated receiptsand meeting and travel schedules must be retained for submission with the Travel Expense Report. Lodging will be allowed for the night prior to the commencement of the meeting if the time set for the start of the meeting requires theindividualto leave homepriorto 6 a.m. of the day of the meeting. Lodging will be allowed for the night following the meeting if the individual could not have arrived home prior to 12:00midnight following the meeting. Lodging in connection with separate, consecutive meetings or conferences shall be permitted if it is less costly than returning to the city for the Jiights between the meetings. In instances where an individual has the option to travel by air and the individual opted to travel by car, reimbursement for lodging shall be allowed on the same basis as if the individual traveled by air:=::-_ 2. Rate of Reimbursement. Lodging reimbursement shall be based on the standard room rate charged at the headquarters hotel for the conference or the hotel most proximate to the site of the meeting. In the event the individual occupies a more expensive room_ accommodation (e.g. a suite), s/he will be reimbursed at the standard room rate. C. Meals. Allowable meals include breakfast, lunch and/or dinner meeting the criteria established below. Reimbursement for meals shall be allowable when travel on official business reasonably requires an overnight stay or when the purchase of a meal(s) is a required component of the conference, meeting or training. Reimbursement shall be on the basis of actual cost when the meal(s) is a component of the conference, meeting or training with proper documentation. All other meals will be reimbursed, up to a maximum allowance not to exceed the daily meal allowance established by the U.S. Department of General Services Administration (GSA) for breakfast, lunch and dinner for the location of the travel. For Page 3 of 8 561 of 669 CITY COUNCIL POLICY CITY OF NATIONAL CITY information regarding the current GSA standard daily meal allowance rate, please contact the Finance Director. Itemized receipts from the dining establishment must be retained for submission with the expense report. Other forms of documentation or receipts that are not itemized may be accepted at the discretion of the City Manager or designee. In claiming reimbursement, time of commencement and termination of travel need to be accounted for. Reimbursement for breakfast is not allowed on the day of departure unless the trip starts prior to 7:00 a.m. Reimbursement for dinner is not allowed on the day of return unless the trip ends later than 7:00 p.m. Reimbursement is not allowed for meals purchased in lieu of a meal(s) included in the fee for the conference, meeting or training unless approved by the City Manager or designee. D. Registration Fees. Fees charged for registration at a conference or meeting which an individual is authorized to attend are reimbursable. Receipts or other acceptable evidence of the amount of the fees, such as a copy of the conference.program/invitation setting forth the fee rates, shall be retained for submission with the claim form. E. Incidental Expenses. 1. Taxi and Bus Fares Reimbursement will be allowed for taxi, bus fare or other transportation=costs when such transportation is necessary in the conduct of City business. No receipts need be provided for such expenses, except for individual charges exceeding $10 00. Such expenses shalt be itemized on the Travel Expense Report. 2. Communications. Telephone, fax and internet charges will be reimbursed for official calls. Unofficial calls charged to the hotel bill should be identified and deducted from the total hotel bill. Individuals that have been issued a City -owned cellular phone, laptop, tablet or other communication device shall use such devices in the conduct of business whenever feasible. 3. Parking,; Garage, and Toll Charges. Parking, garage, and toll expenses will be reimbursed when an automobile is used for transportation. Parking and garage charges will be reimbursed based on the lowest available rate. Valet and preferred or VIP parking/garage rates shall not be allowable unless there is no other option at or within a reasonable proximity to the travel destination. 4. Airport Parking. Expenses for parking a City or personal vehicle at the airport are reimbursable based on receipts. However, airport parking expenses shall be limited to the rates for long-term parking when travel requires parking in excess of 24 hours. When an airport shuttle is used in lieu of personal vehicle, the cost will be reimbursed as well. Pan 4of8 562 of 669 CITY COUNCIL POLICY CITY OF NATIONAL CITY 5. Tips, Gratuities, and Services Fees. Customary tips of up to 15 percent will be permitted on reimbursable items. Tips shall be itemized on the claim form. 6. Miscellaneous. All items of expense not included in any of the other categories but which nonetheless can be clearly identified as incidental to the undertaking of city business shall also be allowed reimbursement. Receipts for these items must be submitted. Examples of such expenses are duplicating expenses and the cost of publications of value to the city being distributed at conferences or meetings. F. P.O.S.T. Expenses. Expenditures in training Police Department personnel under the P.O.S.T. Program shall be authorized and reimbursed by the City in accordance with established P.O.S.T. guidelines. In case of conflict between the P.O.S.T. guidelines and this policy, the P.O.S.T. guidelines shall prevail but only in the case of expenditures properly reimbursable under the P.O.S.T. Reimbursement Program. Should the P.O.S.T. reimbursement be insufficient to cover the actual cost of meals and/or lodging, the City will pay the cost of the difference provided all other travel and meeting expense guidelines outlined in this policy are followed. G. Per Diem and Cash Advance. It is encouraged that individuals:_use their own money or credit cards to finance the trip and then claim reimbursement :upon their return:. If in the judgment of a: department director, estimated expenses for contemplated out -of - city travel are too high to expect the individual to finance the trip and be reimbursed upon his/her return, the department directorMayauthorize advance payment of a per diem for meals. The amount of the per diem shall be equal to the GSA per diem for breakfast, lunch and -dinner for each required meal based on the duration of the travel consistent with the guidelines established by this policy. Upon return the employee shall provide receipts for all meals and return any excess funds. The department director may authorize payment of a maximum of $200 to the individual for other related travel expenses. An advance in excess of $200 must have the approval of the City Manager or designee. Approval of cash advance does not constitute approval for expenditure of the amount so advanced. All actual expenditures must be justified and approved based on limits and allowances set by this policy. Procedures A. Reimbursement of Business Travel Expenses. The individual shall submit a signed Travel Expense Report to the department director after completion of travel. Such report shall show the details of official business expenses incurred and should be accompanied by supporting documents required under Page 5 of 8 563 of 669 CITY COUNCIL POLICY CITY OF NATIONAL CITY this policy. The department director shall review the report for compliance with this policy and affix their signature to signify approval. The Travel Expense Report must be forwarded to the Finance Department within three (3) working days upon return. City Council members and members of boards and commission shall submit the Travel Expense Report to the City Manager for approval. B. Air. Allowance for air travel will be actual round trip via the lowest possible fare. Travel Expense Reports will be accompanied by air passage receipts when filed. C. Personal Vehicle. Individuals shall account for use of their vehicle on a daily basis through use of a Travel Expense Report, which is to be submitted when filing a claim. D. City -owned Vehicle. Authorized personal use of a City vehicle will be accounted `for on a Travel Expense Report, which will. be submitted when filing for reimbursement Individuals will be charged the prevailing IRS standard mileage rate for each mile, and shall be deducted from the total allowable travel expenses: Emergency repair receipts riust be submitted to -Public 'Works for approval prior to reimbursement. Receipts indicating date, accompanied by:meeting and travel schedules much be submitted with the Travel Expense Report when filing a claim. F. Meals All meal receipts will be submitted with the Travel Expense Report. Receipts must be detailed and itemize d .showing exactly what was purchased (not just credit card receipts). G. Registration Fees. Receipts, or other acceptable evidence of the amount paid, must be submitted with the Travel Expense Report. H. Incidental Expenses. Incidental expenses (except for alcohol, entertainment, and items for personal use) shall be itemized on the Travel Expense Report, and receipts shall be provided when appropriate and possible. Page 6 of 8 564 of 669 CITY COUNCIL POLICY CITY OF NATIONAL CITY I. Cash Advance. Approved requests for travel advances (submitted on a Request for Warrant Form — see Administrative Policy 03.06) shall be submitted to the Finance Department at least ten (10) working days before the start of travel. Funds will be released no earlier than three (3) working days prior to the trip departure date. The Finance Department shall deduct from the total expenses claimed, any expense item found to be inconsistent with this policy, and shall furnish the individual with an itemized list of items disallowed. Any amount due the individual shall be paid within ten (10) working days from receipt by the Finance Department of the Travel Expense Report. Alternative Proof of Payment for Training Expenses. A. Individuals periodically request alternative proof of payment methods for reimbursable training expenses, (i.e., registration/tuition fees), advanced, when receipts or cancelled checks are not available. B. As an exception, only when receipts are impractical to obtain, the following may be used in place of receipts or cancelled checks for reimbursement purposes. 1. Course announcement specifyingthe amount of fees, and 2. A document issued by the training institution indicating attendance or completion of the course by the individual. Use of City Credit Card for Travel Purposes. City staffinembersaccasionally attend job -related training and conferences, upon approval of the City's Purchasing Review Committee. Job -related training is often required by state mandates. In order to make airline and hotel reservations, a credit card number must be':provided to guarantee the reservations. Prior to use, any individual wishing to use a City -issued credit card, must read and adhere to the City's Credit Card Policy (Administrative Policy03.14). Per Administrative Policy 03.14: Credit cards may never be used to circumvent established competitive purchasing procedures, or dollar limits established by the City's Municipal Code, City Ordinances or Purchasing Division procedures. Credit cards shall only be used to pay for "PRC" authorized travel and training expenses. Individuals may not use City credit cards for personal expenses even if the intent is to reimburse the City later. See Administrative Policy 03.14 for complete rules and details. Page 7of8 565 of 669 CITY COUNCIL POLICY CITY OF NATIONAL CITY Summary This Policy cannot cover every issue, exception or contingency that may arise in obtaining reimbursement for travel and training expenses incurred in the performance of official duties, and in the use of City credit cards. Individuals are expected to exercise good judgment and show proper regard for economy when traveling in conjunction with official City business. Any expense for which an individual requests reimbursement should directly and manifestly relate to the conduct of City business and, in the event of an audit, should leave no doubt that such expenditure was pre -approved by the Purchasing Review Committee, and is in fact reasonable and necessary in the conduct of City business. Accordingly, the basic standard that should always prevail is to use common sense and good judgment in the use and stewardship of City resources. This Policy shall supersede all previously -adopted policies and procedures pertaining to reimbursement for travel and training expenses and to the use of City credit cards, including Administrative Policies 03.03, 03.04, 03.05 and 03.14 of the City Administrative Manual. This Policy satisfies the requirements of Government Code Sections 53232.2 and 53232.3. Related Policy References Government Code Sections: 53232.2, 53232.3, 53232.4 Assembly Bill 1234 -_ City Administrative Manual Policies 03.03, 03.04, 03.05, 03.14 Municipal Code, Chapter 2.60 Forms: Travel Expense Report: available from the Finance Department or the City's Intranet site. Credit Cardholder Use Agreement: available from the Finance Department Prior Poliey~Atnendments September 19, 2006 October 8, 2013 Page 8 of 8 566 of 669 567 of 669 CITY COUNCIL POLICY CITY OF NATIONAL CITY TITLE: DISPLAY OF FLAGS POLICY # 110 ADOPTED: July 14, 1987 AMENDED: December 2, 2008 Purpose To establish guidelines governing the flying of the following 15 flags: United States of America State of California City of National City Army Navy Marine Corps Air Force United States Coast Guard POW Army Retired Navy Retired Air Force Retired World War II Commemorative_ Korea War Veterans Vietnam Veterans Policy The City of -National City observes the following protocol with respect to the display of the flags. 1) The flagswill be displayed from sunrise to sunset unless properly lighted. 2) The flags will be hoisted briskly and lowered ceremoniously. 3) The flags :will not be displayed on days when the weather is inclement, except when an all-weather flag is displayed. 4) The City Manager is authorized to display at all City buildings the United States flag at half-staff in accordance with the rules set forth below and at such times as the President of the United States, the Governor of the State of California, or the Mayor of the City of National City may, with the concurrence of the City Council, prescribe such action. a) Thirty days from the death of a President or former President. Page 1 of 568 of 669 CITY COUNCIL POLICY CITY OF NATIONAL CITY b) Ten days from the day of death of a Vice -President, Chief -Justice of the United States or a Speaker of the House of Representatives. c) The day of death and on the following day for a United States Senator or Representative, the Governor of the State of California, and any elected official of the City of National City. d) On the closest working day to the date of internment for an employee of the City of National City. 5) The flags will be flown at half-staff on the following days: a) Memorial Day until 12 noon. b) Patriot Day, September 11 c) When flying the flags at half-staff, the flags will be hoisted to the peak for an instant and then lowered to the half-staff position. 6) At Kimball Bowl, the United States; -State of California, and the City of National City flags will be flown_24 hours, 7 days a week, except in the case of inclement weather. These flags shall be lighted during nighttime hours. - 7) All locations will fly the United =States- and the State of California flags on the holidays listed below. In addition, the Kimball Bowl will fly other flags on certain holidays as listedbelow:.. a) Inauguration Day — January 20th b) President Day:— 3rd Monday in February c) Armed Forces Day- 3rd Saturday in May (Ceremonial flags will be flown at Kimball Bowl) d) Memorial Dad -= the last Monday in May (Ceremonial flags will be flown at Kimball Bowl) e) Flag_Day:- June 14 (Ceremonial flags will be flown at Kimball Bowl) 1} Indepefidence Day — July 4 (Ceremonial flags will be flown. at Kimball Bowl) g) Labor Day — lst Monday in September h) California Admission Day — September 9 i) Patriot Day — September 11 (Ceremonial flags will be flown at Kimball Bowl) j) Veterans Day —November 11 (Ceremonial flags will be flown at Kimball Bowl) k) Pearl Harbor Day — December 7 (Ceremonial flags will be flown at Kimball Bowl) 1) Other days that may be proclaimed by the President of the United States Page 2 of 3 569 of 669 CITY COUNCIL POLICY CITY OF NATIONAL CITY 8) The following departments are responsible for raising and lowering the flags at the listed locations: a) Las Palmas Park — Parks and Recreation Department b) Library — Public Works Department c) Civic Center — Public Works Department d) Police Department — Public Works Department e) Fire Department (Stations #15 and #10) — Fire Department f) Kimball Bowl — Public Works Department 9) Upon establishment, the National City Military Affairs Advisory Committee shall assume responsibility for the display of ceremonial flags at Kimball Bowl. - Page3 of3 570 of 669 571 of 669 ClCOUNCIL POLICY CITY OF NATIONAL CITY TITLE: DISPLAY OF FLAGS POLICY # 110 ADOPTED: July 14,1987 AMENDED: December 2, 2008 Purpose To establish guidelines governing the flying of the following 15 flags: United States of America State of California City of National City Army Navy Marine Corps Air Force United States Coast Guard POW Army Retired Navy Retired Air Force Retired World War II Commemorative Korea War Veterans Vietnam Veterans Policy The City of National City observes the following protocol with respect to the display of the flags. 1) The flags will be displayed from sunrise to sunset unless properly lighted. 2) The flags will be hoisted briskly and lowered ceremoniously. 3) The flags will not be displayed on days when the weather is inclement, except when an all-weather flag is displayed. 4) The City Manager is authorized to display at all City buildings the United States flag at half-staff in accordance with the rules set forth below and at such times as the President of the United States, the Governor of the State of California, or the Mayor of the City of National City may, with thc concurrence of the City Council,a request by the City Manager and concurrence by the Mayor with. notification to the City Council during the next available City Council meeting shall prescribe such action prescribe such action. Page 1 of 3 Commented [TG1]: Per Arturo, not all Cit. buildings have } flags, such as Public Worts. NtLK, Cainacho. Casa de Salud, Senior Center. Aquatic Center. 572 of 669 CITY COUNCIL POLICY CITY OF NATIONAL CITY a) Thirty days from the death of a President or former President. b) Ten days from the day of death of a Vice -President, Chief -Justice of the United States or a Speaker of the House of Representatives. c) The day of death and on the following day for a United States Senator or Representative, the Governor of the State of California, and any elected official of the City of National City. d) On the closest working day to the date of internment for an employee of the City of National City. 5) The flags will be flown at half-staff on the following days: a) a-)- Peace Officers Memorial Day until 12, May 15th, unless that day is also Armed Forces Day (sunrise to sunset). b) Memorial Day, last Monday in May, sunrise to noon. b}s„) Patriot Day, September 11, sunrise to sunset. d) 0-Pearl Harbor Rememberance Day, December 7, sunrise to sunset. e) National Firefighters Memorial Day, rotating date in October typciall a Sunday (sunrise to sunset). When flying the flags at half-staff, the flags will be hoisted to the peak for an instant and then lowered to the half-staff position. 6) At Kimball Bowl, the United States, State of California, and the City of National City flags will be flown 24 hours, 7 days a week, except in the case of inclement weather. These flags shall be lighted during nighttime hours. 7) All locations will fly the United States and the State of California flags on the holidays listed below_ In addition, the Kimball Bowl will fly other flags on certain holidays as listed below: a) Inauguration Day - January 20th b) President Day - 3rd Monday in February c) Armed Forces Day - 3rd Saturday in May (Ceremonial flags will be flown at Kimball Bowl) d) Memorial Day - the last Monday in May (Ceremonial flags will be flown at Kimball Bowl) e) Flag Day - June 14 (Ceremonial flags will be flown at Kimball Bowl) Page 2 of 3 a- - Formatted: Indent: Left: 0.19" 1 t Formatted: Indent: Left: 0.44", Hanging: 0.25" 573 of 669 CITY COUNCIL POLICY CITY OF NATIONAL CITY f) Independence Day — July 4 (Ceremonial flags will be flown at Kimball Bowl) g) Labor Day — 1' Monday in September h) California Admission Day — September 9 i) Patriot Day — September 11 (Ceremonial flags wil] be flown at Kimball Bowl) j) Veterans Day — November 11 (Ceremonial flags will be flown at Kimball Bowl) k) Pearl Harbor Day — December 7 (Ceremonial flags wil] be flown at Kimball Bowl) I) Other days that may be proclaimed by the President of the United States 8) The following departments are responsible for raising and lowering the flags at the listed locations: al a) -Las Palmas Park — Parks and Recreation Public Works Department b) Las Palmas Municipal Pool - Public Works Department b) Library — Public Works Department c) Civic Center — Public Works Department d) Police Department — Public Works Department e) Fire Department (Stations 1/15 31 and #,'10 34) — Fire Department t) Kimball Bowl — Public Works Department a) Kimball Recreation Center— Public Works Department 9) Upon establishmcnt, the National Cit ai au me re--nn nsibi1ity f r ♦he p 1 f lb,.u"^t Ki l] R�I r .+ � Page 3 of 3 • - - Formatted: Numbered + Level: L + Numbering Style: a, b, C, ... + Start at: 1 + Alignment: Left + Aligned at: 0.69" + Indent at: 0.94" 574 of 669 575 of 669 CITY COUNCIL POLICY CITY OF NATIONAL CITY TITLE: DISPLAY OF FLAGS POLICY # 110 ADOPTED: July 14, 1987 AMENDED: December 2, 2008 Purpose To establish guidelines governing the flying of the following 15 flags: United States of America State of California City of National City Army Navy Marine Corps Air Force United States Coast Guard POW Army Retired Navy Retired Air Force Retired World War II Commemorative Korea War Veterans. Vietnam Veterans Policy The City of National City observes the following protocol with respect to the display of the flags. 1) The flags will be displayed from sunrise to sunset unless properly lighted. 2) The flags will be hoisted briskly and lowered ceremoniously. 3) The flags will not be displayed on days when the weather is inclement, except when an all-weather flag is displayed. 4) The City Manager is authorized to display at City buildings the United States flag at half-staff in accordance with the rules set forth below and at such times as the President of the United States, the Governor of the State of California, or a request by the City Manager and concurrence by the Mayor with notification to the City Council during the next available City Council meeting shall prescribe such action. Page 1 of 3 576 of 669 CITY COUNCIL POLICY CITY OF NATIONAL CITY a) Thirty days from the death of a President or former President. b) Ten days from the day of death of a Vice -President, Chief -Justice of the United States or a Speaker of the House of Representatives. c) The day of death and on the following day for a United States Senator or Representative, the Governor of the State of California, and any elected official of the City of National City. d) On the closest working day to the date of internment for an employee of the City of National City. 5) The flags will be flown at half-staff on the following days: a) Peace Officers Memorial Day, May 15t, unless that day is also Armed Forces Day (sunrise to sunset). b) Memorial Day, last Monday in May, sunrise to noon. c) Patriot Day, September 11, sunrise to sunset. d) Pearl Harbor Remembrance Day, December 7, sunrise to sunset. e) National Firefighters Memorial Day. rotating date in October, typical a Sunday (sunrise to sunset). When flying the flags at half-staff, the flags will be hoisted to the peak for an instant and then lowered to the half-staff position. 6) At Kimball Bowl, the United States, State of California, and the City of National City flags will be flown 24 hours, 7 days a week, except in the case of inclement weather. These flags shall be lighted during nighttime hours. 7) All locations will fly the United States and the State of California flags on the holidays listed below. In addition, theKimball Bowl will fly other flags on certain holidays as listedbelow: a) Inauguration Day — January 20th b) President Day — 3rd Monday in February c) Armed Forces Day — 3rd Saturday in May (Ceremonial flags will be flown at Kimball Bowl) d) Memorial Day — the last Monday in May (Ceremonial flags will be flown at Kimball Bowl) e) Flag Day — June 14 (Ceremonial flags will be flown at Kimball Bowl) f) Independence Day — July 4 (Ceremonial flags will be flown at Kimball Bowl) Page 2 of 3 577 of 669 CITY COUNCIL POLICY CITY OF NATIONAL CITY g) Labor Day — 1st Monday in September h) California Admission Day — September 9 i) Patriot Day September 11 (Ceremonial flags will be flown at Kimball Bowl) j) Veterans Day —November 11 (Ceremonial flags will be flown at Kimball Bowl) k) Pearl Harbor Day — December 7 (Ceremonial flags will be flown at Kimball Bowl) 1) Other days that may be proclaimed by the President of the United States 8) The following departments are responsible for raising and lowering the flags at the listed locations: a) Las Palmas Park— Public Works Department b) Las Palmas Municipal Pool - Public Works Department b) Library — Public Works Department c) Civic Center — Public Works Department d) Police Department — Public Works Department e) Fire Depaitinent (Stations # 31 and # 34) — Fire Department f) Kimball Bowl — Public Works Department g) Kimball Recreation Center — Public Works Department Page 3 of 3 578 of 669 579 of 669 CITY COUNCIL POLICY CITY OF NATIONAL CITY TITLE: Grant Review Policy POLICY # 114 ADOPTED: February 13, 2001 AMENDED: October S, 2013 Purpose Funds from federal, state, local and private sources are important :resources -that need to be included in the City's financial plan. The following policy provides a framework for City-wide coordination of grant activities among departments, and an opportunity to determine the immediate and long term financial consequences of.accepting -funding. This policy shall cover all departments of City government.. Policy I. The City Manager's Office will act as a clearinghouse for all grant applications. Any City department intending to apply for funding from federal, state, local or private source shall obtain approval from the; City Manager's Office in advance of the filing of any grant application. This shall be -done by submitting_the "Grant Application" form, which is available in the office; of:the City's designated Grant Coordinator. II. The City Manager's Office wi1I review .the "Grant Application" form to ensure that proposals are coordinated with the City's-existing programs, ensure that administrative, reporting and evaluation requirements are adequately addressed by the requesting department, and evaluate the immediate=and long term financial consequences of the proposal. The City Manager's Office may request additional information or presentations from requestrng departments. III. After reviewing the department's request, the City Manager may, at his/her discretion, decide whether to approve the solicitation of outside funding. On a periodic basis, the City` Manager,or .designee, will inform the City Council of any decisions approving solicitations of outside funding. On a case -by -case basis, the City Manager may also choose to refer individual grant funding requests to City Council for consideration. IV. In the event that the grant requires matching funds from the City, and the value of those matching funds exceeds the City Manager's signature authority, Council approval will be required at the time of (or prior to) acceptance of the grant award. V. For those proposals for outside funding which are allowed to go forward, the City Manager shall additionally determine at his/her discretion whether the grant or private funding request is best authored by City Staff or by other sources including professional outside grant writers engaged by the City Manager. If the decision is made to employ Page 1 of 2 580 of 669 TITLE: Grant Review Policy POLICY # 114 ADOPTED: February 13, 2001 AMENDED: October 8, 2013 outside grant writers, a "Letter of Authorization" will be sent from the City Manager or designee to the outside grant writer so as to begin the grant application process. The City Manager shall approve all grant applications. VI. Upon notification by a federal, state, local government, or. private funding source of a grant award or intent to fund, the City department responsible -for administering the grant shall request a resolution approving the acceptance and appropriation of the funds be prepared and calendared for an upcoming City Council meeting. The request for resolution shall include documentation of the intent to fund as provided by the funding source. The City Council shall formally approve the acceptance of all grant and private funds. Related Policy References "Grant Application" and Grant Process Flowchart are available from the City's Grant Coordinator Prior Policy Amendments =:= None Page 2 of 2 581 of 669 TITLE: Grant Review Policy POLICY #114 ADOPTED: February 13, 2001 AMENDED/REVISED: Purpose Funds from federal, state, local and private sources are important resources that need to be included in the City's financial plan. The following policy provides a framework for City-wide coordination of grant activities among departments, and an opportunity to determine the immediate and long term financial consequences of accepting funding_ This policy shall cover all departments of City government. LPolicy l The City Manager's Office will act as a clearinghouse for all grant applications. Any City:, department intending to apply for funding from federal, state, local or private sources shall obtain approval from the City Manager's Office in advance of the filing ef-any grant application. Federal, &Me • 'n the olTice-e4=tite City's designated-6rant-GeerdinatoF.rrr h 1-,Procedure, { Formatted: Left: 1", Right: i" Formatted: No bullets or numbering Formatted: Bullets and Numbering Formatted: No bullets or numbering ILL This shall be done by submitting the "Grant Application" form. which is available in the office--- -- of the City's designated Grant Coordinator. The City Manager's Office will review the "Grant Application" forrnp 1 ^� pf,1� far liberal State and ]Asa] Ge Private Funds" to ensure that proposals are coordinated with the City's existing programs, ensure that administrative; reporting and evaluation requirements are adequately addressed by the requesting department, and evaluate the immediate and long term financial consequences of the proposal. The City Manager's Office may request additional information or presentations from the requesting departments. 1 t Formatted: Bullets and Numbering Formatted: Font- Bold, Underline Formatted: Font: Bold Formatted: Bullets and Numbering I.11-11_After reviewing the department's request, the City Manager may, at his/her discretion, decide - whether to approve the solicitation of outside funding. On a periodic basis, the City Manager; or designee, will inform the City Council of any decisions approving solicitations of outside funding. On a case -by -case basis, the City Manager may also choose to refer an individual grant funding requesrReq to Arr , f Fede-a1 St t a emme Private Funds" to City Council for consideration. 1u 1J.1. For those proposals offer outside funding which that are allowed to go forward, the City. Manager shall additionally determine at his/her discretion whether the grant or private funding request is best authored by City Staff or by other sources to include ine4uding-professional outside grant writers eegaged by the City Manager. If the decision is made to employ a eutsi e pniN g. rant writers, a "Letter of Authorization" will be sent from the <--,--A1,,N;,z±,. r :T,; C Page 1 of 2 { Formatted; Bullets and Numbering { Formatted: Bullets and Numbering 582 of 669 l.Jtr,1 to the outside grant writer so as to begin the grant application process. The City Manager shall approve all grant applications. / .Upon notification by --del ^ ^ 'e• a1 n„ent, or private -pa ndmg-so w;€ a grant- - { Formatted: indent: Left: 0.13 Na bullets or numbering for ^.:i„^sterns the gran sh n rektkieSE—B--FeFeakt6eu apprtving-t-e-acceptanee and appropriation cf the funds be prepared and ealendaned-for an upcoming{ ity Council -meeting. The request for-r-eseletien-s ^l de documentation of the intntt to fund as provide€> by the fending earse T u Cit; Council shall formallyappr-ove the acceptance of all grant and private funds. Related Policy References "Grant Application" and Grant Process flowchart are available from Grant Coordinator yrior Policy Amendments None Page 2 of 2 Formatted: Bullets and Numbering Formatted: Justified, Indent: Left: 0.13" Formatted: Font: Bold, Underline 583 of 669 TITLE: Grant Review Policy POLICY #114 ADOPTED: February 13, 2001 AMENDED/REVISED: Purpose Funds from federal, state, local and private sources are important resources that need to be included in the City's financial plan. The following policy provides a framework for City-wide coordination of grant activities among departments, and an- opportunity to determine the immediate and long term financial consequences of accepting funding. This policy shall cover all departments of City government. Policy The City Manager's Office will act as a clearinghouse for all grant applications: Any City department intending to apply for funding from :federal, state, local or private :sources shall obtain approval from the City Manager's Office in advance offiling any grant application. Procedure I. This shall be done by submitting the "Grant Application"form, which is available in the office of the City's designated Grant Coordinator. The City Manager's Office will review the "Grant Application" form to ensure that proposals are coordinated with the City's existing programs, ensure that administrative reporting and evaluation requirements are adequately addressed by the requesting department, and evaluate the immediate and long term financial consequences of the proposal. The City Manager's Office may request additional information or presentations from the requesting "department. II. After reviewing.the department's request, the City Manager may, at his/her discretion, decide whether,_to approve the solicitation of outside funding. On a periodic basis, the City Manager or designee, will inform the City Council of any decisions approving solicitations of outside funding On a case -by -case basis, the City Manager may also choose to refer an individual grant funding request to City Council for consideration. III. For those proposals of outside funding that are allowed to go forward, the City Manager shall additionally determine_ at his/her discretion whether the grant or private funding request is best authored by City Staff_or by other sources to include professional outside grant writers by the City Manager. If le decision is made to employ a private grant writer, a "Letter of Authorization" will be sent from the City Manager or designee to the outside grant writer so as to begin the grant application process. The City Manager shall approve all grant applications. Related Policy References "Grant Application" and Grant Process Flowchart are available from Grant Coordinator Prior Policy Amendments None Page 1 of 1 584 of 669 585 of 669 RESOLUTION NO. 2016 — RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF NATIONAL CITY ADOPTING AMENDMENTS TO CHAPTER 100 (ADMINISTRATION AND POLICY MANAGEMENT) OF THE CITY COUNCIL POLICY MANUAL BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of National City that the following City Council Policies are amended as recommended by the City Manager: No. 109 Reimbursement for Expenses Incurred in the Performance of Official Duties No. 110 Display of Flags No. 114 Grant Review Policy PASSED and ADOPTED this 18th day of October, 2016. ATTEST: Michael R. Dalla, City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: George H. Eiser, III Interim City Attorney Ron Morrison, Mayor 586 of 669 CC/CDC-HA Agenda 10/18/2016 — Page 587 The following page(s) contain the backup material for Agenda Item: Temporary Use Permit Padres Pedal the Cause Bicycle Ride sponsored by Pedal the Cause on November 12, 2016 from 7:15 a.m. to 8:00 a.m. with no waiver of fees. (Neighborhood Services) 587 of 669 CITY OF NATIONAL CITY, CALIFORNIA COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT MEETING DATE: October 18, 2016 AGENDA ITEM NO. ITEM TITLE: Temporary Use Permit — Padres Pedal the Cause Bicycle Ride sponsored by Pedal the Cause on November 12, 2016 from 7:15 a.m. to 8:00 a.m. with no waiver of fees. PREPARED BY: IDionisia Trejo DEPARTMENT: N bor ..d Services Department PHONE: 019-336-4255 APPROVED BY: EXPLANATION: This is a request from the non-profit organization Pedal the Cause to conduct t � "''adres Pedal the Cause Bicycle Ride" through San Diego County on November 12, 2016. This will be the 4th Annual Pedal the Cause fundraising cycling event dedicated to raising money for cancer research in San Diego County. OUTBOUND — The course begins at Petco Park at 7:00 a.m. heading south towards downtown San Diego and the harbor district. This bicycle ride will enter the City of National City at approximately 7:15 a.m. on Civic Center Drive, then proceeding south on Tidelands Avenue, turning !eft onto W 32nd Street entering on the Bayshore Bikeway on which riders will use until reaching Plaza Bonita Road. Riders will then ride southbound on Plaza Bonita Road leaving National City jurisdiction. The total estimated time of this event duration while in National City is expected to be approximately 45 minutes. Applicant is requesting to cone off a section of the southbound right lane on Plaza Bonita Road to allow riders to exit the bike path onto the road. The event organizers will use the company Statewide Traffic & Safety to manage traffic control. NOTE: This is the first year this organization has requested a Temporary Use Permit to conduct the Padres Pedal the Cause event through National City_ FINANCIAL STATEMENT: APPROVED: ACCOUNT NO. j APPROVED: ;City fee of $237.00 for processing the TUP through various City departments, and $476.00 for Engineering Total fees: $713.00 ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW: NI/ ORDINANCE: INTRODUCTION: 1 ( FINAL ADOPTION: STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Approve the Application for a Temporary Use Permit subject to compliance with all conditions of approval. BOARD 1 COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION: h/P ATTACHMENTS: r^ Application for a Temporary Use Permit with recommended approvals and conditions of approval. Finance MIS 588 of 669 sitateradi " iiikkarle swe,o11441.. dt T'ypr: 0 Fair/Festival _ ❑ TUP City of National City a Neighborhood Services Department 1243 Netting' City Boulevard 9r National City, CA 91950 (619)3354334 a fax (619) 335.4217 www.nallorialuityce.gov e.grry °pedal Event Application E Event ElPeradeeltiarch ❑ Walk or Run 0 ConosrWerfarmance ❑ other ( ) Bicycle ride (non race) efeetThe Padres Pedal The Cause Event Location (Set all Asa being requested) Vadoue roads in Naticaatl City (sae attached Infarmidion p Set -Up Stalls Hate Time NA Day of week Event Starts Date Narembertz,atr78 Event Ends Date November 112.2015 Breakdown Ends Date Ti„ 7.1 yarn Day of Week Saturday Time Sam Daycrweek Saturday lime NA Day of Week Applicant (Your name) Anne Marbarger Sponscxing Organization Pedal the Cause Event Coordinator Of different from applicant) Josephine Men, CCSD Sport Event A+ialling Address 1286 University Avenue, #268, San Diego, CA 92103` Day phone! 917-355.1317 Alter Hours Phone Cell Fax Puck information phone760 642 2725 E.inaojo@cced.onm Appricard agrees to bevestigare, defend, Indemnify and hdd harmless the City, Its Miters, enrpdoyees and awls from and against any and all lose, damage, Heb1 s , claims demands, detriments, casts, charges, expense (nctrad4ig aw�yr itoxt's fags) and cams of sedan of any charmY ` character W1 eraCiiy, Ts officers, employees and agents may balk, sustain or be subjected to on account of lose or damage i s property cr Me loss of use them and badly Injury to or death of any persons (try but not limled to the employees, subcoreectors, agents and Invitees of each party hereof arising out of « In any eery connected to the occupancy, enjoyment and use of any Clly promises under eels c raerrnerttto the aederrt permitted by I. The undersigned also undenstands are the city s refund policy for application prvoessrn g and fatally use and that fees and drarges are adjusted and ars subject to change. Signature of Applicant: i9✓.% cats 986A 1 e alole 43.oe1. FCC s?Procctcis/Reportiiiy la your organization a "Tax Exempt, nonprofit" organization? Yea 17 No ❑ Are admission, entry, vendor or participantfees required? Yss [7 No ❑. NYES. please explain the purpose and provide amount (a): Participants raise funds for Pedal the Cause in return for rtdina In the event. Amount raised varies by each Individual. 100% of funds go to charitable causes. $ $3.6m Estimated Gross Receipts Including ticket, product and sponsorship sales from this agent. $ $0,5m Estimated Expenses for this event. tam $ What Is the projected amount of revenue that the Nonprofit Organization will receive as a result of this event? 2 590 of 669 Special Event Application ( Reese esnipIete the following sections with es parch dotal possiblesirce fees end requirements acs� based on the intrrnabon you prude us. D:scri io l ■ First*me event ❑ Returning Evert 13 include site map with eppCloetlon Note that this dee ription may be published in our city Public Special Events Calendar: Padres Pedal the Cause is a fundraising cycling event that takes place in San Diego each year to raise funds for cancer research at Moores Cancer Center, Salk Institute for Biological Studies, Sanford Burnham Prebys Medical Discovery institute and Rady Children's Hospital. The event raises around $2.2m Antirlpsted # participants: 400 = 450 a,Ildpaiad # of Spedstorn: 0 7rafri Control. Security, First ,did .nil : ^r•_:si': it _'' Requesting to does sheet(s) to vehicular tattle? Yee 0 No List any streets requiring closure as s rest oil the aysrd (pm/We map): Coned lane requested on Plaza Bonita Rd. Cyclists present between Farm and 7. rn. Please refer to attached map. Date and one of atr+eat doeu 6am Date and lima of street reapenir 8.45a m ® Other t leh). Requesting to poot "na parking" notices? Yee ❑ No 2 El Requested 'No Aube on cep stree andfar paw iota gist stmeteperking lots) (provide map) Q Eimer (explain) 591 of 669 Security and Crowd Control Depending on the number of participants, your event may require Police services. Please describe your procedures for both Crowd Control and internal Security: Not required . Have you hired Professional Security to handle security arrangements for this event? Yes 0 No ® if YES, name and address of Security Organization Security Director (Name): Phone: if using the services of e prefessionel security -firm AND the event will pour Ort City property, please .pMiiide rimy Of as insert/nee certificate. atte of at least $1 Million deflate occourancOl$2 Mon dollars aggregate, a wad evidencing additional lid endorsee naming the L qr - of National Orty, Its officers, employees, and agents as additaonal tnsurods. Evidence of insumnoe rat' :be ptovitied by the vendor or ims <pswre7 is the Cars -Risk Manager for raarew and apt ptor to the Went, Fs this a night event? Yes ❑ No 0 if YES, please state how the event and surrounding area will be illuminated to ensure safety of the participants and spectators: First Aid Depending on the number of participants, your event may require specific First Aid services. First aid station to be staffed by event staff? Yes ® No ® First aid/CPR certified? Yea No ❑ 1 First aid station to be staffed by professional company. Si- Company AMR - see attached medical plan Accessibility Please'describe yourAccessibtTity Ran for access at your event by individuals with disabilities: Event will be open to cyclists with disabilities. 4 592 of 669 Elerii•nts of your 'Event Setting up a stage? Yes ❑ No MI ❑ Rewarding Clty's PA system u Requesting City Stage: if yea. which dze? ❑ Dimensions (13)28} ❑ Dimensions (20)28} ❑ Applcart providtng own stage - (Dimensions) Setting up tables and chairs? ❑ Furnished by Applicant or Contractor # a tables ® No fables being set up # of chafes II No hairs befog set up ❑ (For City Use Only) Sponsored Events — Does not apply to co -sponsored events # of tables MI No Wales being set up # of chains ® to chains being set Contractor Name,{- T r Contractor Contact Information Mingo eliyilkate Pion Wisher Salting up other equipment? ❑ SWUM, Equipment *Plain) ❑ Other (explain) Not semrg up any equipment i Sted above at event Having amplified eeurRd and/or nude? Yana ❑ No I:1 ❑ PA System for announcements ❑ CD player or DJ music ❑ Lhre Mum ► ❑ $mati 4-5 piece Ova band ► ❑ Large 8+ pig lave band ❑ Other ex in) if using, be music or a DJ. O. Contractor Name Address My/Slate Phone Number Using lighting equlpmeni at your event? Yes ❑ No MI ❑ Bringing fh awn fighting eget ❑ Using professibnai Ong my > Company Name City,Stte Phone Number 593 of 669 Using electrical power? Yes 0 No8 Q Using on -site electricity ❑ For sound and/or lighting ❑ Bringing 1n generator(s) 0 For sound and/or lighting ❑ For Food and/or refrigeration Q For food and/or refrigetsrtlon PL.E E.No#E You may be required taspply for a # mpoiaryr health penult if food or bevemges- are sold of gives aww during yqur•special event Also see `Permits and Compliance' on page 8 In the Spealarl Event Guide, For additional information on obtaining is ternpormy health -permit, please sonteat the County of San Diego Envir onn dHeal61 at (819) 338.2363. Having food and non-alcoholic beverages at your event? Yes 0 Note ❑ Vendors preparing food on -site ► # P. Business License # if yes, please describe how food will be served and/or prepared: ❑ Vendors bringing pre -packaged food ► # I. Business License # ❑ Vendors bringing bottled, non-alcoholic beverages (1,e., bottled water, can soda. etc.) ► # ❑ Vendors selling food # ► Business License #(s) ❑ Vendors selling merchandise # I. Business License #(s) ❑ Food/beverages to be handled by organization; no outside vendors O Vendors selling services # s Business License #(s) ► Explain services ❑ Vendors passing out information .only (no business license needed) # ► Explain type(s) of information 41 No selling or informational vendors at event Having children activities? Yes 0 No® PLEASE NOTE, in the event inflatable jumps a* provided at the event, The City of NatioiaI City requires commercial liability Insurance With Kinds of at least $1 Minion dollars per 000urrenee/$2 !Wigton doilers aggregate. In addition, MB City of National Cfty moat be named es an Additional Insured . pursuant to a separate endorsement, which shall be provided bythe vendor or its Insurer to the Cityrs Risk Manager, along 0.1111 the Cerilfic ate of-tnsurance, for aeon: it prior to the event. The application should be flied but at least chaise& prior to the event. There lea fee to process the permd application. For questions or to obtain a copy of the'Facilityy Use Application'', please contact the EngineeringlPublic Works Department at (619) 338-458D. . ❑ Inflatable bouncer house # 0 Rock climbing wail Height ❑ Inflatable bouncer slide # 0 Arts & crafts (Le., craft making, face painting, etc.) ❑ Other 6 594 of 669 Having tlreworios or aerial display, Yes 0 No RI Q Vendor name and license # Dimensions Duration Number of shells Max. sire PLEASE NGTE.: in the event firevrc * oranofiher aerial display 'spiraled for your event, The City of National Clty requires aommerdel flatbilty Ineumncewith drugs of at -bast $2 Nation dollars par Occurrence/ $4 MM1on dollaraaggregate, to addition, the City of Na banal City must behanied as an Addklonal Insured pus ant to a sepossia rindoreenisnt,wr ich'O it be pn v ded by the vender or fte insurer to the aty's Risk Manager, along -with tlha t ert ficete of lneurarrce, for approval prior tette • event. Depending on the size and/or nature of the flreviorks display, the City reserves the right to reqiiest higher Ilabiity limiEs. Thevendor !mot sleo-obtaln a fireworks permitfrom tare Nation Oily Flr� Department smiths coatis $502.00 Arranglng for media coverage? YeeM No [] ® Yes, but media will not requite special set-up. 0 Yes, media will require special seat -up. Describe Evert Sicrnago PLEASE MOTE: for aty apture:tor cO onaored events, bonnets publictzlrg the evert now be pieced an the eidsflng poles oh the 180 block and 3'10tbiac k of National City Boulevard. The' roars must be made bathe Ctyta Corti; Please te to theCifyys Special Event 3tridebookend Fes • Sdredu% foradditional biertrriaoti. • Are you planning to have sigma at,your event? Yee ® No 0 Yes; we w post sigmage # _ Dimensionssee 3#tactie 1 slgnage plan ❑ Yes, having Inflatable signage #: Ir. (complete lollatsble 131gnage Request form) ❑ Yes, we wit have tanners # 0 What will signs/banners say? © How wUl signs/banners be anchored or mounded? Waste Mar,-, jt nierf Pi,EASE.NO 1E: One Mist for ecru. 250 peaptl is required, unless It* applicant cat ahaw il* there are ggIrdealeciffies In _the inrrrredtete area avaiabie to the public during the event. Are you pletvring to nravide portable rea rooms ditto event? Yes El No P1 if yes, please Identify the foilardng:'s ► Total number of portable toilets: i► Total number o€ADA ecaess(ble portable toilets: 0 Contracting with portable toilet vendor. a. Company Fhona Load -in Day & Time b Load -out Day & Time Portablatolleb io •bo aarvscW. b The 595 of 669 Set -quip. Breakdowns.. Cl an -up Setting up the day before the event? ❑ Yes, will set up the day before the event. ► # of set-up day(s) Fh1 No, set-up will occur on the event day Requesting vehlde access onto the turf? ❑ Yes. requesting access onto turf for set-up and breekdovm (complete attached Vehicle Access Request form) No, vehicles will load/unload from nearby street or parking lot. ❑ City to install fitter fence ❑ Applicant to install fitter fence 111 N/A Breaking down set-up the day after the event? ❑ Yes, breakdown will be the day after the event. Ir # of breakdown day(s) ❑ No, breakdown wlii occur on the event day. How are you handling Glean -up? ❑ Using City crews ❑ Using volunteer clean-up crew during and after event. ❑ Using professional leaning company during and after event. Miscellaneous Please list anything Important about your event not already asked on this application: Please refer to attached information pack for information on the event and routes. Please make a copy of this application for your records. We do not provide copies. 596 of 669 eirposdideiseto Special Events Pre -Event Storm Wolter Compliance Checklist 1, Special Event Information Name of spedal Evern: Padres Pedal the Cause gent Address: Various roads in Rational City yea s of idtendees: 400 Event tiose{coordator: Pedal the Cause Piton Number: 760642 2725 11. Storm Water Best Management Practices (BMPs) Review YES NO NJA WIE enough trash cans provided far the event? Provide number of trash bins: N . A WM enough, reeeangbins provided fbrthe event? I Provide nurrd ierof recycle bins:, • N • A WAL lid: portable toilets two tecoxdxy containment two? e'Wa far ADA oornp@bnt partnbie tithe Do ail storm drains have screens to teniporert y protect ash and deb* from errterlrr ? i► i . A Are spill death" lilts readily available et designated spots? N A * A Past -Eve t Storm Water Compliesee Cbeekliiet will be completed by City Staff. 597 of 669 City of National City PUBLIC PROPERTY USE HOLD HARMLESS AND INDEMNIFICATION AGREEMENT Persons requesting use of City property, facilities or personnel are required to provide a minimum of $1,000,000 combined single limit insurance for bodily injury and property damage which includes the City, Its officials, agents and employees named as additional insured and to sign the Hold Harmless Agreement. Certificate of insurance must be attached to this permit The insurance oornpany issuing the Insurance policy must have a A.M. Best's Guide Rating of A:VII and that the insurance company is a California admitted company, If not, then the insurance policy, to the issuance of the permit for the event. The Certificate Holder must reflect City of National City Risk Management Department 1243 National City Boulevard National City, CA 91950 Organization: l t eY$ce Person in Chan of Activity: ' Orme f'nr-Arrre xer Address:' 512 irA -de L N Ire+. t ` .74 507 Telephone: _ rt k r) t1. t-iDatets} of Use: o, - 12 ze HOLD HARMLESS AGREEMENT As a condition of the issuance of a temporary use permit to conduct its activities on public or private property, the undersigned hereby agr+ae(s) to defend, indemnify and hold harmless the City of National City and the Parking Authority and its officers, employees and agents from and against any and all claims, demands, costs, losses, liability or, for any personal injury, death or property damage, or both, or any litigation and other liability, including attorneys fees and the costs of litigation, arising out of or related to the use of public props or the activity taken under the permit by the permittee or its agents, empl • or oont Signature of Applicant Official Title: C kei--6'Lee Date: 7/2441 Fer lima* Certificate of Insurance Approved Date 10 598 of 669 PRflRIS PEUQ[ ,„ AUTHORIZATION Of' AGENT 1, the owner as the Permit Applicant or legal representative for the Permit Applicant identified below, hereby authorize my agent, listed below and its authorized employees, to act on my behalf and apply for such City of San Diego, County of San Diego or other such permits that are deemed necessary for the Padres Pedal the Cause event to take place in November- 2016_ Permit AnpNcant lnfnrmaNnn• Name: Pedal The Cause Street Address: 512 Via de ]a Valle, Suite 302 City, State, Zip Code: Solana Beach, CA 92075 Phone Number 314-62439 Print Name: Anne Mar»rger Signature: Title: ref Operating Date: une 15, 2016 Agent odn.,nmu,m Firm Name: CCSD Sport Event Authorized Employe Josephine Alien, Robert Panzere, Katie Roehrich Street Address: 1286 University Avenue, #268 City, State, Zip Code: San Diego, CA 92103 Phone Number: 917 355 1317 Print Name: Josephine Allen Signature of Agent: 11 Date: June 15, 2016 599 of 669 Rib O'd TOM P. QV , 2101. a2506 MOM TM ChM aSS DIESO WO GOWN R /Mt SONOINSTAVO =TO 1210 Qai►T'it '* 1O 69105 RECEIVED MAY 012014 •TAXPA Y CFt otolf4CATE NMI. REVENUE SERVICE ST. t.OUIS, MISSOURI 513 21133 P.433 DOWAIMONEW OW UM TEM= lays Zdentifieetion runner: yams 17053043464 23 COOtotC Pam' LSI Contact TalephOe* Melee/ 129-1100 AccOUWWW Period Radielp Dsaeibe= 31 Public Charity y a► u : ilecb} {3) Mt) Parm $.0O Requirad; Tee Ue*iVe late of t C JwW 12, 2013 tributiCa ctibility: Teo no =0 3I20$ Dear sp6Xioanti we are jOlsesed to Wows you that Won ravioli C! Your e►ppid.cat ioo for tax =asp ,status w have e you are exempt truest Vedanta income tax = der section Sti (0i t3) of the Zt.t zee3 Revenue code. Cout_rib ticros to you era deductihle wider won 3?0 eZ the Cede. Worn are also qualified te receive tax deductible bequests, devisee., tre, atsre or grifta under :die& aci5, 3140 or 9reega1 tthe code. ns y x tins. abCultl i it: your this letter tumid help �t rqueids. arganisations exempt tamer section soitol (3) of the co4e arc thither ClaitaiZied *Meat�, We date:raised that you ars amity der the Cod saeoa(ei� the hooding of lees; Biome see enclosed publication 4323,-34c iaruss chide for 501td311 Palle Oberieipag, for sone helpful info:Manion about your reepc saibi3 hies as es eiXegept aelreiettillitittees. 1e1a$%r.s Publication, 4223-PC $OO'd 6t9Y 319 tT8 siaeerely4 a pore attempt Ox9nnisatices Letter 93'? �ri7'sht a nra SW& - SRI sOrVi �1oZ-i4-�J.YN 12 600 of 669 Padres Pedal the Cause 2016 Cy -ding Event City Permits Information Pack 106 1 spoirrEWNT 601 of 669 About Pedal The Cause • Padres Pedal the Cause is a 501(c03 Non Profit that raises money to support cancer research at: • Moores Cancer Center at UC San Diego Health • The Salk Institute for Biological Studies • Sanford Burnham Prebys Medical Discovery Institute • Rady Children's Hospital -San Diego • The Padres Pedal the Cause cycling event takes places annually and is in its 4th year in San Diego • Riders obey the rules of the road during the event. This is not a race event. • 501(c}3 Tax ID number: 46-0552414 • More information can be found at: http://sand ego.pedalthecause.org • Approximately $2.2 m will be raised for cancer research in San Diego • CCSD Sport Event is the authorized agent for Padres Pedal the Cause for all items relating to routes, permits and traffic control 602 of 669 Event Summary catin4.4rwriva.v.trytatromp • November 12 & 13, 2016 • Approximately 400 cyclists on day 1 and 1,300 cyclists on day 2 • Start and finish location is Petco Park, both days. Padres are the major partner for the event • Wave starts (7 minutes apart) will begin to split up riders from the start of the event I Appraximate start time is 7.0Oam both days • Event is a rules of the road event, not a race • Except for start of ride traffic control within City of San Diego there are no road closures or traffic control required in other Cities • Riders will be instructed to obey rules of the road, ride in bike lanes / shoulders where applicable, stop at stop signs and traffic lights and give way to traffic where road rules require it 603 of 669 Route Summaries Day 1 . 100 miles o 87 miles M•• .1r aee,nw..pe-.g-e r 100 mile route: r ifTM 4 rlheu'f •T: � 1}1•i VII., IA ttrikiigo Gegiw. Z 1. l•¢ ♦ ii Zit? ns ;Ail IF et' h..% 87 mile route: .' .,,;�, . iy�„ d •L : �.,..• n https://ridewitiv s.com/routes/15556417 htt�sridewithgps.comJroutes/15556417 1 605 of 669 Da . 79 miles . 61 miles ■ 37 miles a 23 mils • 10 miles -- ---- - ----------- 4t.o4. •_s-x- . ..:-..c=a,a;rr. adorprph* - -�r rr+r•c�*a*tasi+". _:=-� 79 mile route https:/Jridewithgps.comf route/1559 24J Escortm yeti L. 37 mile route https:/jridewIthRoS.com/rov /1489961 61 mile route https://rid ithgps.com/routes/1559191 606 of 669 Day 2 79 miles; 61 miles 37 miles , 23 miles 10 miles 23 mille route httREPridewithamcomiroutgs/15592292 No* it;iivvd Noel Air Station (Ftlsey Field) sr 10 mile route https:iiridewitheps.comiroutesi151Q3219 ,4,411 r rtvg• ) ./.. i Aei w rouPP:r:;,, i • .tev-Jev tie. -, kik A • 11 jr. • - 1 Atom Mop 40o, C i ; ' 3 m I if O. L. . 4 !. 411 ,t 4 — .erpco 607 of 669 Route Through City of National City PIWHES fi;W1RLD 1NrP Route Through City of National City 1,44LIW#& Cilia Roads used within city of National City LEFT onto E Harbor Dr RIGHT onto Civic Center Dr CONTINUE onto Tidelands Ave LEFT onto W 32nd St STRAIGHT (before LEFT' bend) to enter Bayshore Bikeway Follow Bayshore Bikeway - keep river to your RIGHT. RIGHT onto Plaza Bonita, Rai (use road - NOT bike large) Il Ie 2.9 4.9 5.0 6.2 6.4 Rider Times • Riders are expected to be in the City of National City between 7.15am and Bam on Saturday November 12, 2016 Harbor Drive ▪ There will be San Diego police traffic control along Harbor Drive to safely escort riders out of San Diego City. • Traffic control escort will end at the turn onto Civic Center Drive / Tidelands Ave From this point riders will be folnowing the rules of the road and obey all stop signs, traffic lights etc. Bayshore Bikeway • We would like to explore temporarily closing the Bayshore Bikeway but in the event this is not possible volunteers will be positioned at the start and finish and at key locations along the Bayshore bikeway to warn other users of the event taking place ▪ Riders will be instructed to keep to the right9 at all times on the bike path and ride single file 609 of 669 r•• 1 • Bayshore Bikeway Exit & Bonita Rd, Time Frame: 7:03 AM 7:31 AM Staff: (3) Volunteer 0 (1) CHP / certified traffic flagger Slgnage: (1) Straight Ahead (1) Right Turn (1) Caution Cycling Event Ahead _: Rider route Coned lane (#1 lane only) Notes: • CHP / certified flagger keeping local traffic out of coned lane. • Vclunteera keep riders on route and make sure they turn into coned lane, not bike path • Full traffic control plans are being drawn up by Statewide Traffic & Safety, who will manage traffic control and coned lanes on the day • TOME STAFFING — ROUTE TEAM 4 Padres Pedal The Cause 2016 Medical Personnel Plan Medical Personnel Provided By 1. AMR, BB08 Balboa Avenue, San Diego, California 92123 . (858) 492 350D 2. Padres Pedal the Cause Medical Staff Locations of Medical Teams November 12, 2016 • Petco Park. Stationary team. 4am to l0pm - o EMTx1 o MD x 1 o .RNx1 Rest Stop 1. Stationary team Bam - 9.15amn. Moves to rest stop 4 after all riders through. o EMTx1 ' 0 RN x 1 • Rest Stop 2. Stationary team 9am -1lam. Becomes roving team after a11. riders through. o EMTx1 o RN x 1 • Rest Stop 3. Stationary team gam-11.30aam. Becomes roving team after all riders through. . o BMTx1 o RNx1 • Rest Stop 4. Stationary team. loam - 1.30pm. Becomes roving team after all riders through. o EMTx1 o RN xi • Roving medical tear 1- front half of route. 7am - 5pm o EMT x2 Roving medical team 2 - mid / rear half of route. lam - Spm o EMTx2 November 13, 2016 • Petco Park. Stationary team. Gain to 10pm o EMTx1 o MD x 1 o RN x I • Rest Stop 1. Stationary team 7.30am - 9am. Moves to rest stop 4 after all riders through. 611 of 669 Padres Pedal The Cause 2016 Medical Personnel Plan o EMTx1 o RN x 1 • Rest Stop 2. Stationary team Sam - 9.30am. Becomes roving team after all riders through. o EMTx1 o RNx1 • Rest Stop 3. Stationary team 8.30am- 10.30am. Becomes roving team after all riders through. o EMTx1 o RNx1 = Rest Stop 4. Stationary team 9.15am -11.45 am. Becomes roving team after all riders through. o EMTx1 o RNx1 • Rest Stop 5. Stationary team 10am - 1pm. .o EMTx1 . o RNx1 Rest Stop 6 (Family Ride), Stationary team 7.30am - Bam. Moves to Rest Stop 5 after all riders through. o EMTx1 o RN x 1 Roving medical team 1- 62 mile route o EMT x2 • Roving medical team 2 - 27 J 38 mile route o EMTx2 Medical Incident Procedure All riders will have a central telephone number to call with any incidents. This is a direct line to the event control center at Petco Park Minor incidents on the route; will be called in to control center at Petco Park Communications Manager will dispatch a medical team to deal with the incident, Medical team will assess if further medical treatment is necessary. Minor incidents at reported at. rest stops; will be dealt with by the stationary team there. Riders who continue to ride after a minor incident / illness will be monitored at future rest stops by the medical team. Serious incidents on the route; involving concussion or serious injuries, will be assessed at the scene by riders, who will call 911 if necessary. All riders will be issued with the attached event emergency procedures. 24 612 of 669 Emergency Procedure Pease carry this with you Event Emergency Number: I ] Medical beams will be stationed at each rest stop during Padres Pedal the Cause to deal with minor Injury and illnesses only. In the event that a motet serious medical incident arises please follow the procedures below. 1. Stay With the Injured cyclist. Designate a person to remain with the injured cyclist at all times. If there Is any concem.of a neck or head trauma the injured cydists should be stabilzed and not moved until medical assistance arrives. 2. Warn and direct traffic. Designate someone to redirect traffic, if necessary, to avoid the incident scene. 3. Cali 94-1 . if the injury is beyond basic first aid designate someone to dial 9-1-1 • Identity yourttetf and your exact location State the nature of the InJury, . (headinecdr, fracture, Toss of consclousness, heat illness. etc.) and the number of injured persons Instruct the emergency vehicle exactly where and how to reach the activity area (refer to route gutde/diredlons to hek) wfrth location): 1j major intersecting streets 2) street addresses 3) landmarks • Stay on the telephone tine until the dispatcher disconnects • Return to the Injury scene to provide further assiatanoe, if needed 4. Call the event emergency number above. After 9-1-1 (or if not calling 9-1-1 ) call event control an the emergency number above. They w9 wid establish and dispatch the closest vehicle end the event medical team to rise with emergency vehicles. b. When the emergency Ater/ices arrive. Mk for the fold w ng information: • Whtch hospital win they be taking the injured person to? .6. DO NOT cell Injured parson's family members. This vini be done by'the Evert Director once they have e-stabilshed the seriousness of the Lunt on. f you art► bivalved in an Incident In en area where you do vast have c&I coverage, you will need to take the *snowing actions: • Have others check their cell phones, different providers may have coverage in the area. • Designate a cyclist to reach the nearest lend tine to make an emergency calf. • Rag down e passing vehicle end ask them to reach a land Jlne. • Remember the last loan you sciw a support van or how far you are from a rest stop, that may be your closest contact Smertphonei may be able to give you a GPS location even in a low cell cover area. If you have. a gamin cyciing c ter with mapping check that far your location. Remember to carry on your person ▪ A copy of your health insurance card or the Information written on a card Information on your allergies and medications 613 of 669 Route Signage Signs will be placed as shown below at each turn marked on cue sheets. In some areas (e.g. where cyclists are on the same road for more than 3 miles or at complex intersections) there may be additional signs placed to indicate cyclists should continue straight on the route. Subject to permission, signs will be placed on street furniture such as poles or sign posts. Care is always taken not to obstruct or obscure any existing signs. Signs will be placed on Friday November 11, 2016 and Saturday November 12, 2016 for the following days routes. Signs will be removed after the last rider each day. PEDAL ham. Signs: *Size: 24n X ° PEDAL Tie. 26 614 of 669 ITATEDAD I NXTTT, 00/24i16 THIS CERTIFICATE IS ISSUED A8 A MATTER OF INFORMATION ONLY AND CONFERS NO Rom UPON THE CERTIFICATE WILDER. THIS CERTIFICATE DOES MOT AFFIRMATNELY OR NEGATIVELY , EXTEND OR ALTER THE COVERAGE AFFORDED BY THE POLICIES FLOW. THIS CERTFICATE OF INSURANCE DOES Nor CONSTITUTE A CONTRACT BETWEEN TIE ISSUING INSURERS), AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE OR PRODUCER, AND THE CoITW{CATE HOLDER. IMPORTANT: If the certificate holder Is an ADDRTIONAL INSURED, the policy ) mist be endorsed. If SUBROGATION IS WAIVED, subject to the terms end conditions Af the pnRlw, I»: plots May require an EINIONSEITient. A statement an this csr°diie:i be does not confer rights to the cer Acute holder In Neu of such endorsemerd(eaj. *x CEPMF!CATE OF LIABILITY INSURANCE mecum EiportUndenvrtters.com Inc. A Division of Sport mood Special Event lnsw a /Agency USA P.O.Box 1131 _ Lek* Ptecld NY 12948 "WEED WB Pmyre n SIonsgemeni Inc Pedal The CeaasO San Diego 512 VIR de is Ve5e Suite 382 Solna Bed CA, 92D COVERAGES em-aao: BIBS NNAL InInigspnrtunderwriters. WC MI: 86.467-67TO ellININIER INSe1R9iA, NewInsuranceCompany' NAIC4 INSURER DI INSURER D neumenis air: CEiTTW LATE NUMBER: A-YS-SU-18-05.08.24667.26 REVISION MIMBEIth THIS IS TO CERTIFY THAN THE POLICIES OF IN uRANOE LISTER BELOW HAVE BEEN ISSUED TO THE INSURED NAMED ABOVE FOR THE POLICY PERIOD INDICATED. INOTWITHssr'ANpINGI ANY REAUREMENT. TERM OR CONDITION OF ANY CONTRACT OR CY1HER DOCUMENT WITH REsPEOT to WHk i THE CBRTFICATE MAY BE SUED OR MAY PERTAIN, THE IN URANOE AFFORDED BY 71-EE POLICIES DESCRIBED HEREIN IS SUBJECT TO ALL THE TEAMS, EA:Lust:lMS AND cONOrTIONS OF SUCH MUMS. LIk/TB SHOWN MAY HAAVE BEEN WOWED BY PAD CLAIMS_ LMR TT* TIPS CIF WeJRAICR N PC=NU1 Bn IA= I tutees SiNePIAI.Laaaae,RY• a GieR A X X Y X COUDIERCAL DENIM& LIABILITY I OpoyD INCLUDES ATHLETIC PArn t*APANTS GEINL SalliERATE LNrr APPLIED P1:FI: X POLCY f Loc ADTMICELE imam IN in re 11 R ANY AUTO ALL O N ED AUT SCHEDULED AUTOS HMO AUTOS N011.0 RNR AUTOS 199572044/2 05t016 05/202018 11/13F2016 11/13/201 B EACH OCCUHREtCE FIRE©A5MGE(Any *Ne) i 1,000,000 s300,000 LIED EXPpmyNru4.1.40 PERSONALS ADV aaN,IURY e EXCLUDECI s 1.000,000 OENENALAGEREGATE PRODUGIS- Comm:4P Aso COASSINEDSINGLE LWr Me At:ell:Duo BODILY INJURY (RP pas* $3,000,000 s lioOO,O0O i F 1,000,O0D $ BODLY t11URY (Perm: PROPERTY DAMAGE 1 a l UMBRELLA uAB excsesLlAs X DEDUC TILE RETENTION S WIDONSCIRIPINDITEN APCOMPUNINEDADITY IirsidoryirINS gym DasON Hmdr ePBC4AL PROVISO Ns Wow OTHER OCCUR CLAWS MACE 1996720402 05126/2016 11 /12,2016 EACH 0C0URRE NNE e e0 ASoftECJITE a 1,000,000 s TrN D NIA OTYL riSTs I Eft EL.EACHAOGT E1 i Etcsie e-EABAR.€ 4!E e DESCRIPTIDN OP OPAIATtO 1LOCATIONS/v ei EAnspn ACORD 141. AdCee[meI Remaerks le edIAL, If Pm space Ism dri ij Liability Policy Deeduullble: $0.00 per each bodily ir►juur arproperty damage claim. ISO Occurreroa farm CG 00 0401 13 and company's specific looms. RS: Cycling Odhireg or , bb ertk � Legal Liam requires that � signs a waiverhaleaae. The celibate bolder Is named as Additional insured Wth respect 1tInucti next ode or omiealens td the Named Insured end only nth reaped tD Chao opo atlone nt the ins tad during ie coverage Period. CE Rr1FICATE HOLDER EL DISEASE - POLICY MIT City of National City- RY! Management Dept 1243 imaiond City Shod Ns0eeid City, DA, 919QQ ACORD 25 (2006l09j CANCELI ATION SHOULD ANY OP TIN: A00411 DaE:SCRj PDLDIRS RE CARCIS,410 INFOI5 THE EXPIRATEIN I ATETHERE0#,NOTICEWIU.NEDELNENE0I NAi SNCEWiTHTNEPOLICT1'ROvNIONNS, AUTHORIZED REPRESIDITATIVII but DI Porno i1988- 2009 ACORD CORPORATION. Ail rlghle reserved. The ACORD neme and logo me registered marks of ACORD 615 of 669 AGENCY CUSTOMER ID: A-YS$EU-1 4Wd667-26 LOC 8• ADDITIONAL REMARKS SCHEDULE Page 1 of AGENCY �N.Inderwriters.cam Inc. NAMED DEWED SEE Pmgam Mama:ma t ha Pedal The Cause San Diego 512 Via de Ma Vale Suite 802 Solana Beach, CA, 92076 PCLICY MtABER 19957204.02 CARRIER wuc CODE 23641 New Hampshire Insurance Company EMMA DATE 05261201 B ADDITIONAL REMARKS THIS ADDITIONAL. REMARKS FORM IS A SCHEDULE TO *CORD FORM, FORM NUMBER: 25 FORM TITLE: Certificate of Liebllv Insurance Polley Barad and Effective al' 05126201810A6:00 PM EST The cerllflcate holder was added EFFECTIVE as at O824t16 ACCIPkt 1ST t2008l01i el 0$ ACOIKO CORPORATION-ARCORPORATION-AR rialto resol veld. The ACORD name and logo are registered marks of ACM 1D 28 616 of 669 CITY OF NATIONAL CITY NEIGHBORHOOD SERVICES DEPARTMENT APPLICATION FOR A TEMPORARY USE PERMIT RECOMMENDATIONS AND C OND111ONS SPONSORING ORGANIZATION: Pedal the Cause EVENT: Padres Pedal the Cause DATE OF EVENT: November 121 2016 TIME OF EVENT: 7:15am to B:OOam APPROVA DEVELOPMENT SERVICES RISK MANAGER PUBLIC WORKS FINANCE FIRE POLICE CITY ATTORNEY YES ix ] NO [ ] YES[x] NO[ ] YES [ ] NO [x] YES [ x ] NO [ ] YES[x] NO[ ] YES Ix I NO [ ] YES[x] NO[ ] SEE tNDmONS [ x ] SEE CONDITIONS [ x ] SEE CONDITIONS [ ] SEE CONDITIONS [ x ] SEE CONDITIONS [ x ] SEE CONDITIONS [x ] SEE CONDf11ONS ( x ] CONDITIONS OF APPRQVAL: DEVELOPMENT SERVICES ENGINEERING The lane shift will not be a problem, as long as the proper signage is provided. Engineering will review the traffic control plans once submitted. Attached Is the standard cover sheet for an traffic control plan applications. Fee for plan review is $476. FINANCE Pedal the Cause will need to apply for a business license. They are non-profit and therefore will not need to pay. CITY ATTORNEY Requires an indemnification and hold harmless agreement, and a policy of general liability Insurance, with the City and Its officials, employees, agents and volunteers as additional insureds, with amounts of coverage to be determined by the Risk Manager POLICE The mice department does not have any stipulations for thls event. We will provide extra patrol in the area. 617 of 669 RISK MANAGER (619) 3364370 • A valid copy of the Certificate of Insurance • The insurance policy has a oombined single limit of no less than $1,000,000.00 (ONE MILLION DOLLARS) for each occurrence and $3,Q00,000.00 (THREE MILLION DOLLARS) in aggregate that would cover the date and location of the event. • The insurance company issuing the insurance policy has an A.M. Best's Guide Rating of A: VII and that the insurance company Is a California admitted company. • The applicant has properly executed the hold harmless and indemnification agreement.' • The Certificate Holder reflects: City of National City Risk Management Department 1243 National City Boulevard National City, CA. 91950 Name, address and contact information for the broker that provided this Insurance policy. In order to fully meet the City Insurance requirements it will be necessary for the applicant to provide a separate additional insured endorsement wherein It notes as the additional insured as The City of National City, its officials, agents and employees" FIRE (619) 336-4550 No fees for this event Stipulations required by the Fire Department for this event are as follows: 1) Maintain Fire Department access at all times. Emergency services access shall be given to all emergency apparatus upon approach 2) Access for Fire Department shall be maintained at all times. At no time shall fire lanes, fire hydrants, fire protection systems of all types etc. be obstructed at any time. A minimum of 20 feet wide shall be maintained for the use of fire lanes 3) First Aid will be provided by organization 4) Fees can only be waived by City Council 30 618 of 669 CC/CDC-HA Agenda 10/18/2016 — Page 619 The following page(s) contain the backup material for Agenda Item: Temporary Use Permit - Sweetest Ride Custom Car & Bike Show hosted by Sweetwater Harley Davidson on October 22, 2016 from 10 a.m. to 3 p.m. at 3201 Hoover Avenue with no waiver of fees. (Neighborhood Services) 619 of 669 CITY OF NATIONAL CITY, CALIFORNIA COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT MEETING DATE: October 18, 2016 AGENDA ITEM NO. ITEM TITLE: [Temporary Use Permit -Sweetest Ride Custom Car & Bike Show hosted by Sweetwater Harley Davidson on October 22, 2016 from 10 a.m. to 3 p.m. at 3201 Hoover Avenue with no waiver of fees. i PREPARED BY: [Dionisia Trejo PHONE: [(619) 336-4251 EXPLANATION: DEPARTMENT: N APPROVED BY od Services Department This is a request from Sweetwater Harley Davidson to conduct the Sweetest Ride Custom Car & Bike Show on October 22, 2016 from 10 a.m. to 3 p.m. at 3201 Hoover Avenue. This event will consist vehicle and motorcycle displays, food vendors, live entertainment and other vendor booths. There will be a registration fee to participate in this event as a vendor or vehicle display, however all proceeds will benefit the "Loving You Through It" a non- profit breast cancer awareness organization. Security will be provide by J. Casper & Associates and the applicant will also provide their own stage and audio equipment for this event. The applicant is also requesting to close a small section of Hoover Avenue at W. 33'd Street to the public street area just located in front of the business of 3201 Hoover Avenue from 9:00 a.m. to 4 p.m. NOTE: On September 27, 2011 City Council approved a similar event also sponsored by Sweetwater Harley Davidson. FINANCIAL STATEMENT: ACCOUNT NO. [City fee of $237.00 for processing the T UP through the various City departments, plus $339.40 for Public Works, and $476.00 for Engineering. Total fees: $1,052.40 ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW: NIA APPROVED: Finance APPROVED: MIS ORDINANCE: INTRODUCTION: FINAL ADOPTION: STAFF RECOMMENDATION: [P►pprove the Application for a Temporary Use Permit subject to compliance with all conditions of approval with no waiver of fees. BOARD I COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION: [NA 1 ATTACHMENTS: [Application for a Temporary Use Permit with recommended approvals and conditions of approval. F2n of FFq "yR 621 of 669 1 '` , Sip 14 2016 09:45am P002/007 IS your organization a 'lax l xe-M K, nonprofit" organization? Are admission; entry, vendor or partic ipant:fees required? _yt6 A, NO YES.:. NO .: If.YES, please•explairi the purpose and'prciviiie ount(s): t71.0D $•Estimated Gross Receipts including pow; product and sponsorship sales from this event. Estimated Expenses for,this event...:: $ A n G lut is the projected. amaunt.of navenae that the'NOnprofit Or+ganizattofi will receive as a result of this•event? r. , Please provide a DETAtLED DESQ TI 14 of..Our event. Include•details regarding am components of your event such as the Lite di Vehit ; arimhrials; rides or any other pertinent Information•ataout the event, . • , . . YES _ NQ If the event tnvotves•the- .sale of -cars, will the°cars:come exclusively #ram - National Cit_y_car. -dealers? if., No, list any.additIonal dealers involved in the. sale: . 2 622 of 669 Sep 14 2016 09:46am P003/007 YES KNO 'Does the event involve theixt kaie, of eicohoild beverags? . X. _YES itenikar sexvides. he :sotd itthe. eVeria..IfYes,. Osage describe:, Ala Will . . . . hib)4 lialjte0 k4tit! *r:L6.1... • it/. YES IND Does the event -involve route of any kind along streets, sidewalks or highways?- .1f YES, attach detailed Map of your proposed route indicate the dinktion oftravei;•and provide a written nerratiVelo:expWn your route. X YES .NO. Does the event iriValvea fixed venue site?. If YES, attach a _detailed site map showing all Street iinpactedby the:Oen!. • ‘1 • • X. YES NO Does the event involve the use of tents orcanopies? If YES; Number:of tent/canopies • /0 . --Sizes ID itii) NoTe.:- A separate Fire Department permit is required for tentsor canopies. • - . 1. YES NO Wil the event involve the use of the.Crity stage, or PA system? In addition to the roUte.map riquirad, above; Meese attach.a diagram stowing the oVeraltlayout and Set-up Iddationsfor the f011awing -•• • . > Alcoholic and Norialcaholic Concession and/or -Beer Garden areas, > Food Cdntession artdior.Food Preparation areas qi Please describe how f ad Will be seried et the -event: kit JO ( (2 If you intend to cook food in the event area pleaSe-specify the method: GAS - _ELECTRIC -" CRAFt064'. , OTHER (Specify) • • • • - • • • • )- Portable and/or PermanentToJ Facilities_ - • • • Number of portable toilets: --(1 for every 2gi people is reqUited, unless the applicant cen shim that th arafacilitiet in'the iMmediatia•area available tothe public. during theevent). • Tables and Phairs > • Fencing, barriers and/or barricades - - • - - • . > Generator locations and/or sourda of electricitY > Canopies or tent lacitiona (indlude tent/canopy dimensions) > Booths,- exhibits, dliplays or enclosures : - - ›• Scaffolding, bleachers, platforma, stages; grandstands or related Structures > Vehicles and/or trailers 1-•1 1 - • - - • - : ' . > Other related event cornPOnehts• nottovereclaboVe > Trash•containes and dumpsters - - : (Note; YOtiust properly diSpose ofWeste and garbage throughout the term of your event and immediately upoil oondlue.ion of the everit-ft area niust be returned -to a clean ;condition) - . , Number af trash cans; Trash containers with lids: • Describe yOurplan for clean-up and •rerh_oval.of.iivaste and.garbage during and after the -event: 623 of 669 • r Sep 14 2016 09.4781 P004/001 Please describe your pro t es for• both.Crowd;Controaar}d,internai Secaity: :. sou' Main YES NO Have you hired.any professional Soourity.O ganizetion to handle.secuniy arrangements for this event? IfYE_S,,please.lisi:. • Security.. C ganiial on: :3:. •eb4. "4 • dle.: /li _YES Securty Organization Address: • • Security:Director (Nari* Phone; O Is this -a night event? If.YES, please state how the eventer* surrounding.area • will be illuminated to ensures safety of the •panic nts and spec taco s:• Please indicate what eirangorient •you• hay, . made for_pfovidngFirst'Aid-Staffing and Equ ment. at 11,4r . AM:. toutitr..- Please describe your Amessibility Plan for access WI- Air 041_, 10.12 Orr . ighu Sirvic iet yo tt event by individuals. ities:. • Please. provide. a detailed, description of your. PARKING•plan: Please describe your plan for DISJ B.ED PARKING: 4 624 of 669 Sep 14 2016 09:48am PO05/001 Please desscribe •your Plans to notify alf resida its,.businessos and:chutohes impacted try the • event ) /1 hu.dmik94 NOTE: Neighborhood residents must; be notified 72hours-ln advance when events are •. scheduled in'e City perks: ` . . . • ,.YES ,• NO Are there any musical entertainment features related to your event? If YES, • please state the: umber. of atErges,'tieniber:o?.bands arrtdtype of music. • Number of Stages: . ! Number cf Bands:. • Tye of Music: • AXES _NO ' Wil! sound. ampWicication be used? If YES,please aee indicts: • Start time: /D+) pm finish *Time. J, 6 0 • arn', :% YES — NO iMIPsound check• s_be,00nduited priotto the.eve nt? 'if YES,•pbeese indicate: Start { pm Finish Time . .arnipm Please describe the sound equipment that u 9t be used for your event: _YES ,kNO Fireworks,. rockets, or o her.pyritechnics?: If YES,. please describe:. . YES 4NO -Arty, signs;• banners, decorations, spacial fighting?. •{fYES, Please •descr e:• Revised 08110106 5 625 of 669 Sep 14 2016 09:49am P006/007 C� :of , a !Anal City. . i PIX PRoPERtY.USE, N] 4LD IRILES:S-AND IND MIIFICA flON A 1 EMENT :`:• Persons requesting use of City faalities or personnel are required to provide a mirtriurn of tf,00O,011O .combined single iinia=jnsurance for -bodily. injury: and property damage: whichciticludet the:. City its officials, agents • and . employees named as additional:4nsured and to -sign #he -I -told Harrnless Agreement. Certificate of insurance inust.be.attache'd to this.perrnit. . Organizatlon-- Person: In.Charge .of Activlity: Address CAI/ • l dlf. Telephone 044 int-447 7 Date(s) of.:.Use:.° /O'a2a+ stio HOLD. HARMLESS .ACRE tiENT As a condition of the issuance of atemporary.. use permit tc conduct its activities• on public or.private property, the.; undersigned:hereby agree(s)-to.-defend, indemnify and hoid`harmless'.the:City of National :City. andthe:Parking Authority and its officers;:'employees `and,agertts'from andagaiinstt any and all claims, demands; :costs, losses, liability or, for any personal: injury, death or property damage, or.botti, or any -litigation. and other iiabil`rxy', including attorney' fees and the costs of litigation, arising... out of or.:related to the. use .of public property -or the activity taker un' -r.the,permit.oy fhe,.perrr tlee.or.its agents,,emptoyees Of . CO Official Tate 'or Office Use,r ruj' Certificate ofInsurance Approved .Date. 626 of 669 C A L E voot) trc4N. 0 0 cr X 47 ------ W(' Cte+OQ ---- 'voclu gc.,tkP vs 1 coiw r-j Mt-4 1.0 act ICttb1 log# ►te 111 4- • (0. Ib D :60 SLOE VI dGS 627 of 669 OCTOBER 22ND 2016 IOAM TO 3PAI ! rfr var., 71111,.?,. °Fri 171,11'1'4TO, ,NEVER DYPI.fC4750 'N))reost uniitior kirllikiat, afiew tPtirrtJ •• •,, Join SweetwaterllFand Ricols on 3r4 Ihe Salon iar iireast Cancer benejit with proceeds donatta to i'Loting YOU Through it" noniprolit organization that protides oncolog beauty selivites to carer patients onflergoing illonotheraps, t r,9 LL:,Irsl..AV, It 'Iret )J930 (1)f;.7-40.; ityrie,,itreefiraidi'llavidv;:;`;i.!, 628 of 669 CITY OF NATIONAL CITY NEIGHBORHOOD SERVICES DEPARTMENT APPLICATION FOR A TEII3PORARY USE PERMIT RECOM1iENDATIONS AND CONDITIONS SPONSORING ORGANIZATION: Sweetwater Harley Davidson EVENT: Sweetest Ride Custom Car & Bike Show DATE OF EVENT: October 22, 2016 TIME OF EVENT: 10:00 a.m. to 3:00 p.m. APPROVALS, DEVELOPMENT SERVICES RISK MANAGER PUBLIC WORKS FINANCE FIRE COMMUNITY SERVICES POLICE CITY ATTORNEY YES [x] NO [ ] YES [x] NO [ ] YES [ x ] NO [ ] YES[x] NO[ ] YES [ x ] NO [ ] YES [ ] NO [ x ] YES [x] NO [ ] YES [ x ] NO [ ] SEE CONDmONS [ x ] SEE CONDITIONS [ x ] SEE CONDITIONS [ x ] SEE CONDITIONS [ x ] SEE CONDITIONS [ x ] SEE CONDITIONS [ ] SEE CONDITIONS [ x ] SEE CONDDTONS [ x ] CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL:. RISK MANAGER (619) 336-4370 • Provide a valid copy of the Certificate of Liability Insurance wherein the City of National City, its officials, agents, employees and volunteers are named as an additional insured by way of a separate endorsement. • The insurance policy must have a combined single limit of no less than $1,000,000.00 (ONE MILLION DOLLARS) for each occurrence and $2,000,000.00 (TWO MILLION DOLLARS) in aggregate that would cover the date and location of the event. • The insurance company issuing the insurance policy has an A.M. Bests Guide Rating of A: Vfl and that the insurance company is a California admitted company. • The Certificate Holder reflects: City of National City do Risk Manager 1243 National City Boulevard National City, CA. 91950-4397 • Name, address and contact information for the broker providing this insurance policy was provkied. 629 of 669 DEVELOPMENT SERVICES (619) 336-4318 PLANNING Speakers andlor lights shall face west and not towards residential properties. ENGINEERING A traffic control plan will be required for any closure, street restrictions or detours to be conducted. For events where the public street is used as a venue, there may be trash and debris discarded in the street, it Is the responsibility of the event holder to place BMPs at the nearest downstream storm drain inlets to prevent this material from entering the inlets. The traffic control plan shall be submitted with fees in the amount of $476,00 PUBLIC WORKS STREET DIVISION 1. (8 ea.) "NO PARKING" signs @ $0.45 ea, = $3.60 2. (8 ea.) Barricades a $0.35 ea. = $2.80 3. (1) Truck for 6 hours @ $12.07 hr. = $72.42 4. (1) Public Works staff a $32.57 for 2 hours = $65.14 5. (1) Public Works staff @ $48.86 for 4 hours OT = $195.44 Total = $339.40 FINANCE All vendors will need a National City Business License. Food Truck will need a Health Permit and must also apply for business license, CITY ATTORNEY Requires an indemnification and hold harmless agreement, and a policy of general liability insurance, with the City and its officials, employees, agents and volunteers as additional insureds, with amounts of coverage to be determined by the Risk Manager. POLICE A security company is listed as being used. The police will provide "extra patrol." 630 of 669 FIRE (619) 336-4550 No Inspection Required Stipulations required by the Fire Department for this event are as follow;: 1) Access to the street to be maintained at all times, to both entrances and Fire Department connections for fire sprinkler systems, standpipes, etc. 2) Access to Sweetwater Harley Davidson to be maintained at all times, to both entrances and Fire Department connections for fire sprinkler systems, standpipes, etc. 3) Fire Department access into and through the event areas are to be maintained at all times. Fire apparatus access roads shall have an unobstructed width of not less than 20 feet and an unobstructed vertical clearance of not Tess than 14 feet 4) Fire Hydrants shall not be blocked or obstructed 5) Participants on foot are to move immediately to the sidewalk upon approach of emergency vehicle(s) 6) Vehicles in roadway are to move immediately to the right upon approach of emergency vehicle(s). 7) Provide a 2A:10BC fire extinguisher at stage. Extinguisher to be mounted in a visible location between 342 to 5' from the floor to the top of the extinguisher. Maximum travel distance from an extinguisher shall not be more than 75 feet travel distance. 8) If cooking booths are used, booths to have one 2A:10BC on site. If grease or oil is used for cooking, a 40:BC or class "K" fire extinguisher will be required. All fire extinguishers to have a current State Fire Marshal Tag attached., Please see attached example. 9) If tents or canopies are used, tents having an area in excess of 200 square feet and or canopies in excess of 400 square feet or multiple tents and or canopies placed together equaling or greater than the above stated areas, are to be used, they shall be flame-retardant treated with an approved State Fire Marshal seal attached. A ten feet separation distance must be maintained between tents and canopies. A permit from the Fire Department must be obtained. Cooking shall not be permitted under tents or canopies unless the tents or canopies meet "State Fire Marshal approval for cooking. Please see Fire Department for 631 of 669 11 direction. Certificate of State Fire Marshal flame resistancy shall be provided to the National City Fire Department if applicable. A permit for the projected canopies/tents' shall be four hundred ($400.00) dollars. Fees can only be waived by City Council. Canopies: Tents: 0-400 sf- $0 401 — 500 sf - $250.00 501 — 600 sf $300.00 601 — 700 sf - $400.00 0 —200 sf - 201 — (+) sf - $200.00 $400.00. 10) Fire Department access into and through the booth areas are to be maintained at a]I times, 11) If any changes are made to this event a fire safety inspection may be required to be conducted by the Fire Department prior to operations of the entire event. Fee for after hour/weekend inspection shall be $200.00 dollars for the first two hours. A fee of $100.00 dollars shall be charged for every hour (or part) after the first two hours. 12) Site map indicating access points, booth layout and parking areas is included. if you have any questions please feel free to contact me. 632 of 669 CC/CDC-HA Agenda 10/18/2016 — Page 633 The following page(s) contain the backup material for Agenda Item: Staff seeks City Council direction on the relocation of the City sponsored Christmas on Brick Row event to Kimball Park and a synthetic ice skating rink for an additional cost of $5,000. (Community Services) 633 of 669 CITY OF NATIONAL CITY, CALIFORNIA COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT MEETING DATE: October 18, 2016 AGENDA ITEM NO. ITEM TITLE: Staff seeks City Council direction on the relocation of the City sponsored Christmas on Brick Row event to Kimball Park and a synthetic ice skating rink for an additional cost of $5,000. (Community Services) PREPARED BY: Audrey Denham PHONE: 619-336-4243i EXPLANATION: See attached staff report. DEPARTMENT: Community rvices APPROVED BY: FINANCIAL STATEMENT: ACCOUNT NO. NIA APPROVED: APPROVED: ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW: This is not a project and, therefore, is not subject to environmental review. ORDINANCE: INTRODUCTION: FINAL ADOPTION: Finance MIS STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff seeks City Council direction on the following options: 1. Relocate Christmas on Brick Row to Kimball Park. 2. Sponsor a synthetic ice skating rink for an additional cost of $5,000 Based on City Council direction staff will return with a request for a Temporary Use Permit and funding as appropriate and consistent with stated direction. BOARD / COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION: N/A ATTACHMENTS: 1. Staff Report 634 of 669 CALIFORNIA vc;tirIO NI\L CI IV o mo INCORPORATED City Council Staff Report October 18, 2016 ITEM Staff Report: Staff seeks City Council direction on the relocation of the City sponsored Christmas on Brick Row event to Kimball Park and a synthetic ice skating rink for an additional cost of $5,000. BACKGROUND In 2007, the City hosted the first annual Christmas Tree Lighting Ceremony in front of the Martin Luther King Jr. Community Center. It was a small affair with a Christmas tree, refreshments and holiday carolers. The following year, the event was relocated to Brick Row and included the Christmas Tree Lighting Ceremony, performances, vendors, and a children's snow play area. Over the years the event has had many adaptations, but one thing remained the same, it brought the community together during the holidays. After relocating the event in 2008, attendance averaged 200 to 500 attendees each year. Last year was the most successful event with approximately 2,000 attendees. The increase in attendance can be attributed to the enhanced children's activities and vendors, the addition of the ice skating rink and performances by local community groups, and increased marketing efforts. It was evident the event was outgrowing the Brick Row location. DISCUSSION Relocation of Event For the 2016 Christmas event, staff proposes relocating the event to Kimball Park. The main community event will be a one evening event and would include the City stage for community performances, a tree lighting ceremony, Santa photos, children's activities, ice skating, local community vendors, food vendors, a food court area with tables and chairs, and a marketplace with holiday wares for sale. The relocation allows staff to accommodate the increased number of attendees, while allowing room for continued growth. Attendees will experience improved parking options, enhanced seating for community performances, reduced lines at vendor booths, and overall decreased congestion throughout the event. Furthermore, the Kimball Park restrooms would be used in addition to the portable restrooms, decreasing wait times without increasing the event budget. The new location also provides an opportunity to showcase recent park improvements. 635 of 669 Page 2 Staff Report — Relocation of Christmas on Brick Row to Kimball Park and synthetic ice skating rink for an additional cost of $5,000. October 18, 2016 Skating Rink Last year the City and the National City Chamber of Commerce (Chamber) partnered to expand the event by including a synthetic ice skating rink. The Chamber obtained sponsors to support the synthetic ice skating rink for two days. After discussion with the Chamber, City staff and the Chamber agreed to partner again in an effort to enhance the event. However, due to the popularity of ice skating, City and Chamber staff seek to increase the size of the synthetic ice skating rink and offer the activity for four days. This will reduce wait times, increase the amount of time participants have to ice skate, and give residents more opportunities to participate in this unique activity. The Chamber would take the lead on coordinating the synthetic ice skating rink, which includes logistics, staffing, and sponsorships. Staff asks City Council to consider sponsoring a synthetic ice skating rink this year. The cost of the proposed skating rink is $20,000; staff seeks City Council sponsorship at $5,000. The Chamber has committed to securing the additional funding through additional sponsorships. Therefore, the synthetic ice skating rink is contingent on the Chamber's ability to raise the additional funds. Although the goal is to offer the ice skating activity for four days the actual dates may be less dependent on the Chamber's fundraising efforts. The ice skating rink will enhance the event and be a huge draw for National City residents. RECOMMENDATION Staff seeks City Council direction on the following options: 1. Relocate Christmas on Brick Row to Kimball Park. 2. Sponsor a synthetic ice skating rink for an additional cost of $5,000. Based on City Council direction staff will return with a request for a Temporary Use Permit and funding as appropriate and consistent with stated direction. FISCAL IMPACT Funding for all other costs associated with this annual event is included in the City Council approved 2017 General Fund budget. 636 of 669 CC/CDC-HA Agenda 10/18/2016 — Page 637 The following page(s) contain the backup material for Agenda Item: Staff report seeking direction on amendments to Title 10 of the National City Municipal Code and to City of National City Council Policy 803 pertaining to the sale and use of alcoholic beverages in city -owned facilities operated and controlled by third pa 637 of 669 CITY OF NATIONAL CITY, CALIFORNIA COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT MEETING DATE: October 18, 2016 AGENDA ITEM NO. ITEM TITLE: Staff report seeking direction on amendments to Title 10 of the National City Municipal Code and to City of National City Council Policy 803 pertaining to the sale and use of alcoholic beverages in city -owned facilities operated and controlled by third parties. PREPARED BY: Stacey Stevenson PHONE: 336-4308 EXPLANATION: See attached staff report. DEPARTMENT: Human Res es APPROVED BY: FINANCIAL STATEMENT: APPROVED: ACCOUNT NO. APPROVED: There is no fiscal impact associated with this action. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW: This is not a project and, therefore, is not subject to environmental review. ORDINANCE: INTRODUCTION: FINAL ADOPTION: Finance MIS STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Direct staff to return to City Council with proposed amendments Title 10 of National City Municipal Code and City of National City Council Policy 803 allowing for the governance of the sale and use of alcoholic beverages in city -owned facilities, through approved and executed operating agreements, for all facilities controlled and operated by a third party BOARD / COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION: ATTACHMENTS: Staff Report 638 of 669 CALIFORNIA NA l°NAL C rIT 5CORPORATED City Council Staff Report October 18, 2016 ITEM Staff Report: Seeking direction on amendments to Title 10 of the National City Municipal Code and to City of National City Council Policy 803 pertaining to the sale and use of alcoholic beverages in city -owned facilities operated and controlled by third parties. BACKGROUND Generally, the Municipal Code prohibits alcohol in City parks, but allows alcohol in facilities with a temporary use permit. More specifically, the City of National City Municipal Code, Title 10, Chapter 10.30 — Regulation of Alcoholic Beverages in Public Venues and Places states, "It is unlawful for any person in any city park or in any adjacent city -owned public place to consume any alcoholic beverage or to possess an open alcoholic beverage container." (Section 10.30.030). Section 10.30.040 carves out an exception, allowing for the sale or use of alcoholic beverages in such facilities "in conjunction with an application for a temporary use permit pursuant to Chapter 15.60". These provisions were adopted in 2001. Under the provisions of City Council Policy 803 — Facility Use Guidelines for the Use of Community Centers, the use of alcohol is prohibited in National City Community Centers. The purpose of this report is to seek Council input and direction on modifying the above provisions to allow alcohol when city -owned facilities are controlled and operated by third parties. DISCUSSION The City of National City is the owner of numerous facilities, most of which are controlled and operated by City staff, including, but are not limited to, City Hall, the Martin Luther King Community Center, the El Toyon and Camacho Recreation Centers and the Senior Center. Such facilities are generally open to the general public and are not intended for the exclusive use of any organized group, though such exclusive use may be granted on a temporary basis for special events through the Temporary Use Permit process. Other city -owned facilities are controlled and operated by third parties through various forms of operating agreements. While such facilities 639 of 669 Page 2 Staff Report — Staff reporting seeking direction on amendments to Title 10 of National City Municipal Code and City of National City Council Policy 803 as both pertain to the sale and use of alcoholic beverages in city -owned facilities operated and controlled by third parties. October 18, 2018 may be open to the public, the conditions of access are controlled by the operators. The city - owned facilities currently controlled and operated by third parties include: • 200 East 12th Street (known as "The Former National City Library Building") • The Aquatic Center • The Boys and Girls Club • Kimball House • The National City Depot • Las Palmas Pool • Stein Farm As may be permitted through the respective operating agreements, these facilities, from time to time may host special events (i.e. fundraising events, donor/volunteer recognition, showcases, etc.). When held in privately owned facilities, holders of these types of events often provide refreshments, including alcoholic beverages. In addition, there has been a practice in some City - owned facilities for the operator to serve alcoholic beverages as part of certain special evening events. As currently written, Title 10 of the City of National City Municipal Code does not allow for the sale or consumption of alcohol at the Boys and Girls Club, the Former Library Building or Las Palmas Pool without a Temporary Use Permit because the facilities are located within city parklands. At the time this provision was adopted (2001), the Former Library and Las Palmas Pool were operated by the City, and the Boys and Girls Club building was not considered a City owned facility. Council Policy 803 prohibits the sale and consumption of alcohol at community centers, including the Aquatic Center and Las Palmas Pool, without exception. The authority of third parties to operate and control city -owned facilities is granted through written operating agreements or leases. Such agreements address the terms and conditions of operation. The ability to sale and consume alcohol (or not) is consistent with and appropriate to include with other terms and conditions enumerated in the written operating agreements or leases. As such, staff seeks the ability to negotiate the ability of third party operators to sell, serve, and/or consume alcohol in city -owned facilities based on such factors as the intended use of the facility and the purpose of the sale and consumption, allowing for the sale and/or consumption when it is determined to be appropriate. For example, to include wine as a portion of the cost of attending a dinner may be acceptable whereas the sale of alcohol as a part of the facility's "store" (should one exist) would likely not be acceptable; providing free alcoholic beverages for consumption at an open -house event may be acceptable whereas providing free alcoholic beverages to staff or patrons as a routine part of daily operations would likely not be acceptable. In all cases, the operators would be required to adhere to all existing Federal, State and local laws governing the sale and consumption of alcohol, including all regulations imposed by State of California Department of Alcoholic Beverage Control (ABC), with all agreements, including any provisions related to alcohol, approved by the City Council. Allowing for the ability to negotiate the sale and consumption of alcohol as a part of the operating agreement or lease is not intended to imply that such use will be allowable in all cases or in all third party controlled and operated facilities. 640 of 669 Page 3 Staff Report — Staff reporting seeking direction on amendments to Title 10 of National City Municipal Code and City of National City Council Policy 803 as both pertain to the sale and use of alcoholic beverages in city -owned facilities operated and controlled by third parties. October 18, 2018 RECOMMENDATION Direct staff to return to City Council with proposed amendments Title 10 of National City Municipal Code and City of National City Council Policy 803 allowing for the governance of the sale and use of alcoholic beverages in city -owned facilities, through approved and executed operating agreements, for all facilities controlled and operated by a third party FISCAL IMPACT There is no fiscal impact associated with this item. 641 of 669 CC/CDC-HA Agenda 10/18/2016 — Page 642 The following page(s) contain the backup material for Agenda Item: Staff report seeking City Council direction regarding administration of the City of National City's taxicab and other for -hire paratransit vehicle program. (Finance) 642 of 669 CITY OF NATIONAL CITY, CALIFORNIA COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT MEETING DATE: October 18, 2016 AGENDA ITEM NO. ITEM TITLE: Staff report seeking City Council direction regarding administration of the City of National City's taxicab and other for -hire paratransit vehicle program. PREPARED BY: Mark Roberts, Director of Finance PHONE: 619-336-4265 EXPLANATION: See attached staff report. DEPARTMENT: Finance APPROVED BY: `-7,1424,4 Z2 FINANCIAL STATEMENT: ACCOUNT NO. NA APPROVED: ( Q Finance APPROVED: MIS ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW: This is not a project and, therefore, not subject to environmental review. ORDINANCE: INTRODUCTION: FINAL ADOPTION: STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Adopt the resolution, authorizing the City Manager to negotiate agreements regarding for -hire vehicle program administration with the San Diego Metropolitan Transit System and San Diego County Sheriff's Department and authorizing staff to prepare the necessary amendment to the National City Municipal Code. BOARD / COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION: NA ATTACHMENTS: 1. December 10, 2013 Staff Report of City Attorney and Director of Administrative Services 2. May 21, 1991 Council Agenda Statement of Chief of Police 3. NCMC Chapter 6.04 Sections (260 and 310) — Business Tax License 4. NCMC Chapter 11.70 — Regulation and Licensing of Transportation Services 643 of 669 + CALIFORNIA NATIONAL CITY ALAV INCORPORATED City Council Staff Report October 18, 2016 ITEM Staff report seeking City Council direction regarding administration of the City of National City's taxicab and other for -hire paratransit vehicle program. PURPOSE The purpose of this report is to seek the City Council's direction regarding the licensing and regulation of taxicabs and other for -hire paratransit vehicles (collectively referred to as "for -hire vehicles" through the remainder of this staff report) operating within National City, including authorizing negotiation of the transfer of the administration of the for -hire vehicle program to the San Diego Metropolitan Transit System, negotiation of an agreement with the San Diego County Sheriff's Department to perform checks to ensure operators seeking MTS permits hold National City business licenses, and preparation of amendments and/or repeals of the relevant sections of the National City Municipal Code. At the December 10, 2013 City Council meeting, the City Attorney and Director of Administrative Services delivered a staff report regarding the status of the for -hire vehicle program and the City's options with respect to the future administration of the program. A copy of the report is included with this agenda item for your reference, and information from said report pertinent to this discussion and subsequent recommendations is referenced in this report. BACKGROUND Prior to July 1991, the licensing and regulation of for -hire vehicles operating within National City was performed by the National City Police Department. From July 1991 through December 2004, the Metropolitan Transit Development Board ("MTDB") licensed and regulated the operation of for -hire vehicles in the City, pursuant to an agreement between the City and MTDB. In January 2005, the responsibility was returned to the City. The City Council elected not to extend the term of its agreement with MTDB, by approval of Resolution 2004-233 on December 21, 2004, in part, due to MTDB's limitation on the number of taxicab operation permits it could issue in National City. On the same date, via Resolution 2004-232, the City Council authorized the issuance of permits to allow the three companies permitted to operate sixty-five taxis within the City of National City under the expiring agreement with MTDB to continue to operate the same numbers of taxis upon submission of permit applications and payment of annual permit 644 of 669 Page 2 Staff report seeking City Council direction regarding administration of the City of National City's taxicab and other for -hire paratransit vehicle program October 18, 2016 fees. Shortly thereafter (date unknown), the City Council authorized a total of twenty additional permits for two companies, increasing the number of permits available to eighty-five (for five companies), although the total issued peaked at seventy-five. In anticipation of the termination of the MTDB agreement, the City Council adopted Ordinance No. 2004-2256, enacting Municipal Code Chapter 11.70 providing for the licensing and regulation of transportation services within the City. On that same date, the Council approved Resolution 2004-230, approving the implementation of regulations for paratransit vehicles. Since the City resumed administration of the for -hire vehicle program, permitting has been performed by the National City Department of Finance. Field enforcement of for -hire vehicle regulations falls to the National City Police and Neighborhood Services Departments. In 2005, MTDB, San Diego Transit, and the San Diego Trolley consolidated into one entity, the Metropolitan Transit System ("MTS"). On November 10, 2014, the City Council of the City of San Diego voted to eliminate the limit on the number of taxicab operating permits available from MTS. DISCUSSION Service As discussed above, the City of National City currently has self-administered its for -hire vehicle program since January 2005. While the City Council of the City of National City has approved a "soft" limit of eighty-five taxicab permits, the number of permits issued peaked at seventy-nine in 2006 and has declined to six today. MTS administers the for -hire vehicle programs of seven cities in San Diego County — San Diego, El Cajon, Imperial Beach, La Mesa, Lemon Grove, Poway, and Santee. Presently, approximately one thousand two hundred taxis are operated under MTS authority, all of which may conduct business in any city with an MTS agreement. (These totals do not include vehicles authorized to operate at the San Diego International Airport, which separately issues permits for taxicab operation on airport premises, or those permitted by the San Diego County Sheriff's Department for the unincorporated areas of the County, although there likely is "overlap," i.e., vehicles operating with permits from more than one issuer.) Regulations & Enforcement The National City Municipal Code ("the NCMC") requires for -hire vehicles to meet stringent standards for vehicular safety, signage or markings, fees, internal and external aesthetics, and driver appearance. However, at current staffing levels, it is operationally burdensome for City staff to conduct inspections to ensure such vehicles operating in National City are in conformance with those standards. MTS's for -hire vehicle regulations are similar to those of National City, and MTS's resources allow it to carry out administration and enforcement 645 of 669 Page 3 Staff report seeking City Council direction regarding administration of the City of National City's taxicab and other for -hire paratransit vehicle program October 18, 2016 functions more efficiently than the City of National City and the seven cities for which it currently performs them. Revenue Permitting Section 11.70.030 of the National City Municipal Code, requires that a permit be obtained from the City and renewed annually for each for -hire vehicle operated. The City receives a fee of one hundred dollars for each permit renewal, which currently results in annual revenue (from the currently permitted taxis) of six hundred dollars. Other, higher fees and charges apply to first- time permit applicants and to presently authorized operators applying for additional vehicle permits, but no application has been received from a new operator or from an operator requesting an additional permit(s) since August 2006. Notwithstanding the amounts currently or potentially collected, permit revenues are offset by the for -hire vehicle program's expenses, in accordance with the provision of the California Constitution (Ca1.Const. Art. 13C, § 1) prohibiting a charge imposed by a local government from exceeding the reasonable administrative and regulatory costs of the associated program. Hence, there may be, and is, no net financial benefit to the City from these revenues. Business Tax Licensing In addition to requiring a permit, the NCMC dictates that a National City business tax license be acquired for each taxi operating within the City (NCMC §§ 6.04.260[A] and 6.04.310[A]). The tax applicable to taxicab operators is sixty-five dollars (per vehicle) per year, resulting in annual revenue of three hundred ninety dollars from the six presently permitted cabs. (The aforementioned constitutional restriction does not apply to taxes.) The business tax obligation of for -hire vehicle operators is not predicated upon whether vehicle permits are issued by the City; therefore, this revenue would remain receivable if administration of the for -hire vehicle program were transferred to MTS. Under an agreement with a city for which MTS administers the for -hire vehicle program, the San Diego County Sheriff's Department will perform checks to ensure operators seeking MTS permits hold business licenses from that city. Cost The cost to the City of the for -hire vehicle program as presently administered is negligible and, as noted above, is offset by permit fees and charges collected. There would be no cost associated with an agreement with MTS to administer the program nor with an agreement with the San Diego County Sheriff's Department to perform business tax license checks. 646 of 669 Page 4 Staff report seeking City Council direction regarding administration of the City of National City's taxicab and other for -hire paratransit vehicle program October 18, 2016 CONCLUSION As noted above, the City lacks the resources to adequately inspect taxicabs, operators, and drivers or to otherwise effectively enforce its for -hire vehicle regulations. Entering into an agreement with MTS authorizing it to regulate for -hire vehicles operating within National City limits would ensure more effective performance of these functions. In addition, six taxis operate within the City today, while one thousand two hundred operate under MTS authority in seven other cities in southwestern San Diego County. Therefore, if National City is added to the cities in which MTS-permitted taxis may operate, substantially more cabs would be able to conduct business in the City and service likely would improve. Finally, should the City Council decide in favor of MTS regulation, the negative financial impact on the City, if any, would be insignificant, given for -hire vehicle permit fee revenue and the administrative expenses of the program balance "wash" and business tax revenue is nominal. However, since it is likely more taxicab operators would conduct business within National City and business tax revenue would remain receivable, revenue could increase, depending upon operator compliance. Entering an agreement with the San Diego County Sheriff's Department to perform business license checks would increase the likelihood of compliance and overall revenue at no additional cost to the City. RECOMMENDATIONS Staff recommends the City Council direct staff to: • negotiate an agreement with the San Diego Metropolitan Transit System to license and regulate for -hire vehicles operating in the City of National City; • negotiate an agreement with the San Diego County Sheriff's Department to perform National City business tax license checks of operators applying for San Diego Metropolitan Transit System for -hire vehicle permits; and • prepare amendment(s) and/or repeal(s) of the National City Municipal Code section(s) applicable to for -hire vehicle businesses, as necessary. FISCAL IMPACT At this time, it is not possible to determine the net impact of approval of the above recommendations, as it would be dependent upon the number of taxicab operators choosing to conduct business within National City and their compliance with the City's business tax license requirement. However, the potential negative impact would be three hundred ninety dollars, the current annual business tax revenue received from taxi operators, which would be lost if operators do not comply with the City's business tax license requirement. NEXT STEPS If the above recommendations are approved, staff will contact MTS and the San Diego County Sheriff's Department to begin negotiation of the terms of the necessary agreements. Concurrently, staff will undertake the preparation of the necessary amendments and/or repeals of NCMC sections applicable to for -hire vehicles. 647 of 669 Page 5 Staff report seeking City Council direction regarding administration of the City of National City's taxicab and other for -hire paratransit vehicle program October 18, 2016 ATTACHMENTS Attachment 1 — December 10, 2013 Staff Report of City Attorney and Director of Administrative Services Attachment 2 — May 21, 1991 Staff Report of Chief of Police Attachment 3 — NCMC Chapter 6.04 Sections (260 and 310) — Business Tax License Attachment 4 — NCMC Chapter 11.70 — Regulation and Licensing of Transportation Services 648 of 669 -0— CALIFORNIA NATIONAL eif INCORPORATED CITY OF NATIONAL CITY MEMORANDUM DATE: December 10, 2013 TO: Honorable Mayor and City Council FROM: Claudia Silva, City Attorney Stacey Stevenson, Director of Administrative Services SUBJECT: Report on the Administration of Taxicabs and Other For -Hire Paratransit Vehicles Purpose The purpose of this report is to provide the City Council of the City of National City with an update on the status of the City's taxicab and paratransit program. The report concludes with options for the City Council related to the future administration of the program. Background / Chronology Prior to 1992, the licensing and regulation of taxicabs in the City of National City was performed by the Police Department. In July, 1991 the City of National City entered into an agreement with the Metropolitan Transit Development Board (MTDB) authorizing MTDB to regulate taxicabs and other for -hire paratransit vehicles within City limits. Under MTDB's administration, there were three permitted operators in National City: Yellow Cab, Red Cab and USA Cab, holding a total of 65 taxicab licenses (also known as medallions). Under the terms of the agreement, MTDB regulated the number of medallions, collected annual permitting fees and conducted annual vehicle inspections. On December 21, 2004, the City Council took formal action, via Resolution 2004-233, electing not to extend the term of the agreement authorizing MTDB to regulate taxicabs and other for - hire paratransit vehicles within National City. In anticipation of terminating its agreement with MTDB, on December 7, 2004, the City Council of the City of National City adopted Ordinance No. 2004-2256, enacting Municipal Code Chapter 11.70 providing for the licensing and regulation of transportation services within the 649 of 669 Page 2 Report on the Administration of Taxicabs and Other For -Hire Paratransit Vehicles December 10, 2013 City by the adoption of a uniform transit system. On that same date, the City Council approved Resolution 2004-230, approving the implementation of regulations for paratransit vehicles. In January, 2005, the City of National City assumed responsibility for licensing and regulating taxicabs and other paratransit vehicles operating within the City. Administration of the established permitting process is performed by the Finance Department. Field enforcement of taxicab and para-transit regulations fall to the Police Department and Neighborhood Services. In 2005, MTDB, San Diego Transit, and the San Diego Trolley consolidated into one entity, the Metropolitan Transit System (MTS). Discussion As previously noted, in 2004, when MTDB was responsible for administering the taxicab program for the City of National City, there were three operators (permits) holding a total of 65 medallions. The three operators were Yellow Cab, Red Cab and USA Cab. Subsequent to assuming taxicab administration "in-house" in 2005, the City Council increased the number of operators (permits) to five, holding 85 medallions, adding West Coast Cab and RV Cab. Overtime, the number of operators and medallions has declined. Today, there are two operators (permits), Red Cab and USA Cab holding 17 medallions. There is currently no limitation on the number of permits or medallions available for issuance in the City of National City. Should the City Council desire staff to seek to issue additional permits and/or medallions, it is recommended that consideration of such limitations be first considered. In addition, consideration may also be given to the following: • As prescribed by code, taxicabs and other for -hire paratransit vehicles are required to maintain stringent standards related to vehicular safety, signage or markings, fees, internal and external aesthetics, and driver appearance. At current staffing levels, it is operationally burdensome for staff to conduct inspections for the purpose of determining if such vehicles operating in National City are properly permitted and in conformance with the noted regulations. • The insurance requirements for taxicabs and other for -hire paratransit operators have not been adjusted since adoption in 2004. A review by Risk Management has determined that the current levels are inadequate, recommending increased policy limits. Options Based on the above discussion, the City Council has various options. While there is no action item before the City Council at this time, the City Council could provide staff further direction. Some of the options are: • Accept and file the report. 650 of 669 Page 3 Report on the Administration of Taxicabs and Other For -Hire Paratransit Vehicles December 10, 2013 • Explore returning taxicab and other for -hire paratransit vehicles to the Metropolitan Transit System. • Explore a process for the issuance of additional permits and medallion. • Establish permit and medallion limits. • Consider an increase to the insurance policy limits. Absent direction from the City, staff will continue to administer the program at the current mber of operators (permits) and medallions, and the same insurance policy limits. strative Services 651 of 669 City of National City, California COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT MEETING DATE May 21, 1991 AGENDA ITEM NO. 3 % TIFFS Four year agreement between the City of National City and Metropolitan Tr sit Development Board (MTDB) allowing the MTDB to regulate prat" °ahicles operating in the city of National City r10 St. Knee PREPARED BY EXPLANATI Chief of Police DEPARTMENT Police The Police Department is currently responsible for the issuance of paratransit vehicle permits (taxi cabs, sightseeing vehicles, etc.). The MTDB is willing to assume this rosponsibility at no cost to the City. Advantages of contracting with the MTDB for this service include: 1) Reduce potential City liability; 2) Scheduled inspection of vehicles by trained mechanics; 3) Proactive enforcement of rules and regulations pertaining to rates, operation of vehicles, proper permits and so forth by well trained MTDB employees; and 4) An administrative appeals procedure for those found in violation of the law. Environmental Review Finn ci tater:0, No financial impact. X N/A Account No. f STAFF RECOMMENDATION Authorize City Manager to approve contract. a4ARD/COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION ATTACHMEM Posts Okrei nn No._ 91- 9 4 1. Contract 2. San Diego Metropolitan Transit Development Board Ordinance No. 11 A.200 (Rev. 4/8o) 652 of 669 6.04.260 - Business tax payment —Required. A. Except as provided in Section 6.04.260(B), there are imposed upon all persons conducting business in the city business taxes in the amounts hereinafter prescribed. It is unlawful for any person to conduct business in the city without a valid business tax license. A business tax license is valid when it is issued in compliance with all applicable provisions of this chapter and, except when exempt from tax, paying the applicable tax. B. Any person who is considered to be conducting business by virtue of the prima facie evidence definition in Section 6.04.050 is subject to tax until the collector determines otherwise. The collector may require the submission of proof under affidavit executed under penalty of perjury that the person is not conducting a business within the city. C. Licensed Professionals. Each professional licensed by the state, including without limitation any lawyer, doctor, dentist, health care professional, investment advisor, real estate agent, real estate broker, or insurance broker, who maintains a fixed place of business in the city must pay a business tax as set forth in the tax schedules established under the authority of this chapter. (Ord. 2247 § 1 (part), 2004; Ord. 2224 § 2 (part), 2003) Page 1 653 of 669 6.04.310 - Business by vehicle —Optional rate. A. Except as provided in Section 6.04.070(E)(4), every person not having a fixed place of business within the city and not otherwise designated, who on a regular basis conducts business by vehicle and charges a fee for service, shall pay an annual business tax of sixty-five dollars per vehicle operated within the city, or may make a binding election to pay a business tax measured by business classification and the gross receipts derived from business within the city as set out in Section 6.04.280. B. Any person conducting business by vehicle in the city vending food products or beverages shall pay an annual business tax of two hundred dollars per year per vehicle operated within the city, or may make a binding election to pay a business tax measured by business classification and gross receipts derived from business within the city pursuant to Section 6.04.280. C. Upon payment, identifying vehicle decals will be issued by the collector in a quantity equal to the number of vehicles through which business is conducted. D. Any business by vehicle that operates additional vehicles within the city after payment of annual taxes has been made shall make an additional application to the collector to account for the additional vehicles. After the appropriate tax has been paid for the additional vehicle(s), additional vehicle decals will be issued. E. Taxes for the first year of operation shall not be prorated, unless the annual gross receipt method is elected by the taxpayer. (Ord. 2224 § 2 (part), 2003) 654 of 669 Page 1 Chapter 11.70 - REGULATION AND LICENSING OF TRANSPORTATION SERVICES Sections: 11.70.010 - Definitions. The following words and phrases, wherever used in this chapter, shall be construed as defined in this section, unless from the context a different meaning is intended, or unless a different meaning is specifically defined and more particularly directed to the use of such words or phrases. "Charter vehicle" means every vehicle which: 1. Transports passengers or parcels or both over the public streets of the city; 2. Is routed at the direction of the hiring passenger; 3. Is prearranged in writing for hire; 4. Is not made available through "cruising"; and 5. Is hired by and at the service of a person for the benefit of himself or herself or a specified group. "City" as to jurisdiction means the city of National City, in the county of San Diego, California. "City" as to authority means the city manager or his or her designated representative. "City inspector" means those individuals, regardless of job title, who are authorized by the city manager, and by ordinance, to enforce the provisions of this chapter. "Compensation" means any money, thing of value, payment, consideration, reward, tip, donation, gratuity, or profit paid to, accepted, or received by the driver or owner of any vehicle in exchange for transportation of a person, or persons; whether paid upon solicitation, demand or contract, or voluntarily, or intended as a gratuity or donation. "Cruising" means the movement over the public streets of a taxicab or low -speed vehicle (LSV) in search of prospective passengers; except the term does not include either the travel of a taxicab or LSV proceeding to answer a call for service received by telephone or radio from an intended passenger, or the travel of such a vehicle, having discharged a passenger or passengers, returning to the owner's place of business or to its established point of departure. "Driver" means every person operating any for -hire vehicle. "Driver's identification card" means that license, issued by the San Diego County sheriff's department that permits a person to drive a for -hire vehicle within the county. "Exclusive ride" means exclusive use of a for -hire vehicle by one or more related passengers at a time. "Facially credible complaint" means a complaint based on facts sufficient to establish that the complaint is valid, with an absence of facts to the contrary. "For -hire vehicle" means every vehicle that is operated for any fare for compensation and used for the transportation of passengers over public city streets, irrespective of whether such operations extend beyond the boundary limits of the city. Such for -hire vehicles shall include taxicabs, vehicles for charter, jitneys, nonemergency medical vehicles, sightseeing vehicles and LSVs. "For -hire vehicle" shall not include a public transit vehicle owned or contracted for by the Metropolitan Transit Development Board, the Public Utilities Commission, or a vehicle properly licensed by the state or county as an emergency medical vehicle, or a vehicle involved in an organized carpool not available to the general public. "Group ride" means shared use of a taxicab or LSV where a group of related passengers enter at the same point of origin and disembark at the same destination and pay a single fare for the trip. Page 1 655 of 669 "Implementation regulations for paratransit vehicles" means those regulations adopted by the city council for implementing this chapter. "Jitney' means every vehicle which: 1. Transports passengers or parcels, or both, over the public streets of the city; 2. Follows a fixed route of travel between specified points with the fare based on a per capita charge established in its permit; and 3. Is made available to boarding passengers at specified locations along its route on a variable schedule. "Low -speed vehicle (LSV)" means a motor vehicle, other than a motor truck, having four wheels on the ground and an unladen weight of one thousand eight hundred pounds or Tess, that is capable of propelling itself at a minimum speed of twenty miles per hour and a maximum speed of twenty-five miles per hour, on a paved level surface. For the purposes of this section, a "low -speed vehicle" is not a golf cart, except when operated pursuant to California Vehicle Code Section 21115 or 21115.1. "Medallion" means the numbered plate, sticker or decal issued by the city to the permit holder which is displayed on a for -hire vehicle to indicate the authorized use or uses of that vehicle. "MTDB" means the Metropolitan Transit Development Board or its designated representatives. "Nonemergency medical vehicle" means every vehicle which transports physically and/or mentally disabled persons who require supervision and/or specialized transportation equipment or assistance related to the disability, and such persons' attendants, over the public streets of the city. "Operate" or "operating" shall refer to the solicitation or acceptance of a fare within city limits for compensation. It shall also include, as the context may require, the act of driving, managing or directing the utilization of one or more for -hire vehicles. "Owner" means the person, partnership, association, firm, business, or corporation that is the registered owner of any for -hire vehicle, and that holds the right to use the vehicle for its advantage. "Paratransit vehicle" means any "for -hire vehicle" as defined in this section. "Permit" means the authority under which a person, firm, partnership, association, or corporation may operate a for -hire vehicle as a business. "Permit holder" means any person or approved entity operating a business under a for -hire vehicle permit. "Shared ride" means nonexclusive use of a for -hire vehicle by two or more unrelated passengers traveling between different points of origin and/or destinations, and traveling in the same general direction. "Sightseeing vehicle" means every vehicle which: 1. Transports passengers for sightseeing purposes of showing points of interest over the public streets of the city; and 2. Charges a fee or compensation therefore; regardless of whether any fee or compensation is paid to the driver of such sightseeing vehicle, either by the passenger or by the owner or by the person who employs the driver or contracts with the driver or hires such sightseeing vehicle with a driver to transport or convey any passenger; and irrespective of whether or not such driver receives any fee or compensation for his or her services as driver. "Stands" means public areas designated for specific use by for -hire vehicles. "Street" means any place commonly used for the purpose of public travel. "Taxicab" means every vehicle other than a charter vehicle, a jitney, a nonemergency medical vehicle, a sightseeing vehicle, or LSV which: 1. Transports passengers or parcels, or both, over city public streets. Page 2 656 of 669 2. Is made available for hire on call or demand through "cruising," at taxicab stands or by telephone to destination(s) specified by the hiring passenger. "Taximeter" means any instrument, appliance, device or machine by which the charge for hire of a passenger -carrying vehicle is calculated, either for distance traveled or time consumed, or a combination of both, and upon which such charge is indicated by figures. "Vehicle" is a device by which any person or property may be propelled, moved, or drawn upon a street, except a device moved exclusively by human power or used exclusively upon stationary rails or tracks. (Ord. 2256 (part), 2004) 11.70.020 - Purpose and authority. A. Purpose. The purpose of this chapter is to ensure the safe and orderly operation of paratransit vehicles within the city of National City and to provide that regulation of paratransit vehicles be performed and supervised by the city, in order to best serve the public interest. B. Authority. 1. Authority for this Chapter. The enabling authority for this chapter is Vehicle Code Section 16501 et seq., Government Code Sections 4500(b), 37101, 37350, 37359, and Public Utilities Code Section 120266 et seq. 2. Issuing Authority. The city may designate from time to time the city department that may issue the operational permits and medallions, and who may conduct inspections. (Ord. 2256 (part), 2004) 11.70.030 - Operating permit. A. The following provisions shall govern the application for issuance, denial, duration, transfer, and suspension or revocation of operating permits. 1. Parameters. a. No person shall engage in the business of operating any for -hire vehicle or providing any vehicle for the operation of vehicles for -hire services within the city without first having obtained an operating permit from the city, which permit shall not have been revoked, suspended or otherwise canceled or terminated by operation of law, for a violation of this chapter, or otherwise. A separate permit is required for each for -hire vehicle operated or provided for operation. Specific requirements which must be met in order to obtain an operating permit are set forth in the implementation regulations for paratransit vehicles. b. An operating permit represents the granting of a privilege to operate a for -hire vehicle within the zones specified by the permit for the purpose of the public convenience and necessity. This privilege may be revoked at any time by operation of law, for a violation of this chapter or other laws, or otherwise. c. Any person who obtains an operating permit shall be responsible for the provision of vehicle - for -hire services in accordance with the provisions of this chapter and shall exercise due diligence to assure that drivers of the permitted vehicles adhere to all pertinent requirements of this chapter. 2. Applying for a Permit. a. All persons applying for a permit(s) for the operation of one or more for -hire vehicles shall file with the city a sworn application on forms provided by the city, which shall contain Page 3 657 of 669 information required pursuant to the city's implementation regulations for paratransit vehicles. b. The applicant shall also submit, with the application, a nonrefundable filing fee to be determined from time to time by resolution of the city council, in order to recover the cost of processing such applications. 3. Issuance of Permit. a. The city council shall, in its discretion, determine the total number of for -hire vehicle permits to be granted, which shall be determined according to the best interests of the public for the safe and effective operation of city streets and public transit. b. The city council in its sole discretion may determine the number of permits to be granted any applicant(s) and approve permits for any applicant(s) subject to such conditions as the city council may deem advisable or necessary in the public interest and may establish procedures and criteria for the granting of permits including the use of a request for proposals (RFP) or request for qualifications (RFQ). Before a permit may be approved, the applicant shall pay an initial regulatory fee in an amount to be determined from time to time by resolution of the city council. c. A driver may drive for more than one permit holder. The driver must, however, have on file with, and accepted by, the San Diego County sheriff a separate application on forms provided by the sheriff, for each permit holder with whom he has a current driving agreement. A driver may have on file with the sheriff a maximum of four such applications at any one time. It is unlawful for a driver to accept or solicit passengers for hire in the city while operating the vehicle of any permit holder for whom the driver does not have such an application on file with the San Diego County sheriff. 4. Denial of a permit may be made for any one of the following reasons: a. The applicant is under twenty-one years of age; or b. Within the five years immediately preceding the processing of the application, the applicant has been convicted of, or held by any final administrative determination to have been in violation of any statute, ordinance, or regulation reasonably and rationally pertaining to the same or similar business operation which would have resulted in suspension or revocation of the permit in accordance with subsection (A)(8) of this section. For purposes of this section, a plea or verdict of guilty, a finding of guilty by a court, a plea of nolo contendere or a forfeiture of bail shall be deemed a conviction; or c. The applicant provided false information of a material fact in an application or other document required by this chapter within the past five years. 5. Duration. a. Permits are approved for a period of one year and may be renewed annually upon payment of a regulatory fee in an amount to be determined by the city. b. No permit shall be approved or renewed for any person who has not fully complied with all of the requirements of this chapter and all other applicable laws and/or regulations necessary to be complied with before commencement of the operation of the proposed service. 6. Medallions. a. When the permit has been approved and upon determination by the city that the color scheme and pertinent for -hire vehicles are sufficiently distinctive so as not to cause confusion with other for -hire vehicles already operating, and that the for -hire vehicle, after appropriate inspection, meets the requirements of this chapter, the city will issue a numbered medallion(s) to be affixed to the for -hire vehicle. b. No medallion shall be issued for a vehicle unless the vehicle conforms with all the applicable provisions of this chapter. Page 4 658 of 669 c. The medallion issued to the permit holder must be affixed to the for -hire vehicle for which the permit is approved in plain view from the rear of the for -hire vehicle. The permit holder must immediately report the loss, destruction or defacing of a medallion to the city. It is unlawful to operate a for -hire vehicle without the medallion affixed and visible. d. When a permit has been suspended or revoked, the operation of any for -hire vehicle authorized by such permit shall cease, and its medallion surrendered immediately to the city. 7. Transfer of Permits. a. The privilege of engaging in the business of operating a for -hire vehicle in the city which has been granted a permit is personal to the permit holder, who must be the owner of the for - hire vehicle. The rights, requirements and responsibilities which attach to the permit remain with the holder at all times the for -hire vehicle is operated under the authority of the permit. These rights, requirements and responsibilities, which include, but are not limited to, the requirements of this chapter, will remain unaffected by any agreement or contractual arrangement between the permit holder and those persons who operate for -hire vehicles, irrespective of the form or characterization of the agreement under which the driver operates the for -hire vehicle. b. Each permit issued pursuant to the provisions of this chapter is separate and distinct and shall be transferable from the permit holder to another person or entity only with the prior approval of the city. Taxicab permits may be transferred only after the passage of one year from the date a permit was issued to the original permit holder. All taxicab permits, however, may be transferred upon the verifiable death or permanent disability of the original permit holder. The transferability of permits may be limited by policy established by resolution of the city council. c. In the event that the permit holder is a corporation, partnership or legal entity other than a natural person, prior approval of the city shall be required for any transfer or acquisition of majority ownership or control of that corporation, partnership or legal entity to a person or group of persons acting in concert, none of whom already owns or controls a majority interest. Any such acquisition or transfer occurring without prior approval of the city shall constitute a failure to comply with this section. d. In requesting a transfer from the city, the proposed transferee shall file with the city a sworn application for the transfer and shall comply with the requirements of this section. The permit holder shall certify in writing that the permit holder has notified the proposed transferee of the requirements of this section pertaining to the transfer of a permit. Whenever an application for a transfer of permit is filed, the city shall process the application for transfer in accordance with the procedures set forth in this section for issuance of permits. 8. Suspension or Revocation of Permit. a. Grounds. Permits may be suspended or revoked by the city at any time in the event of the following: (1) The city finds that a permit holder or vehicle driver has continued to violate the provisions of this chapter or the implementation regulations for paratransit vehicles in the past, or is currently violating this chapter or the implementation regulations for paratransit vehicles. (2) The permit owner ceases to operate a for -hire vehicle for a period of sixty consecutive days without having obtained written permission for cessation of such operation from the city. Permission for temporary cessation is outlined in the implementing regulations for paratransit vehicles. The for -hire vehicle or vehicles are operated at a rate of fare other than those fares on file with the city. (4) The permit holder fails to begin operating the for -hire vehicle for which the permit is first approved within ninety days after the approval date. (3) 659 of 669 Page 5 (5) The permit holder has been convicted of assault, battery, resisting arrest, any felony involving force and violence, or any crime reasonably and rationally related to the paratransit industry or any similar business operation which bears upon the integrity or ability of the applicant or holder to operate a for -hire vehicle business and transport passengers, unless five years shall have elapsed from the date of discharge from a penal institution or the satisfactory completion of probation for such conviction. (6) The permit holder has been convicted of a crime that would require a person to register as a sex offender under the California Penal Code. For purposes of this section, a plea or verdict of guilty, a finding of guilt by a court, a plea of nolo contendere, or a forfeiture of bail shall be considered a conviction. (7) The driver's identification card is subject to denial, suspension, revocation, or refusal to renew by the San Diego County sheriff. (8) The driver's California Driver's License is revoked or suspended. (9) The driver is convicted of reckless driving or driving while under the influence of intoxicating liquors and/or narcotics. (10) Permit holders, vehicles, and drivers are required to comply with the requirements of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), and ADA regulations are hereby incorporated by reference. A violation of ADA requirements is a violation of this chapter and subject to a fine or suspension or revocation or a combination. b. Procedure for suspension or revocation of permit. (1) A permit holder shall be notified in writing within ten working days when a facially credible complaint has been filed with the city by a member of the public where such complaint involves the permit holder, the driver of the permitted for -hire vehicle, or the radio service to which the permit holder is subscribed. The permit holder shall investigate the complaint and report its response in writing to the city within thirty calendar days and initiate corrective action where necessary. Where the complainant has agreed to the sharing of their identity, the results of the investigation, findings, and actions shall be communicated to the complainant. (2) In the event the city finds a permit holder has failed to responsibly respond to notification of complaints or to initiate corrective action, or if the city finds grounds to exist for suspension or revocation of a permit under this subsection, the city shall issue a notice of proposed adverse action to the permit holder. If the circumstances of the complaint or subsequent investigation so warrant, the city may issue a notice of adverse action to a driver independently of, or in conjunction with, any adverse action proposed to the permit holder. The city shall refer to the implementation regulations for paratransit vehicles in determining a proposed adverse action. The permit holder or driver in receipt of a notice of proposed adverse action shall be given the opportunity to appear for an informal hearing before a hearing officer designated for this purpose. Failure to appear will constitute waiver of both the hearing and further right to contest. Following the hearing or waiver thereof, the city shall issue the notice of adverse action, if justified by the facts. If the city determines that the permit holder or driver's actions involve criminal activity or constitutes a serious degradation of the public safety, convenience, or necessity, a notice of adverse action may be issued and the action effected without first having a hearing. (4) Upon a finding by the city that a permit holder falls within the suspension or revocation provisions of this subsection, the permit holder or driver shall be notified that his or her permit has been subjected to an adverse action and that the matter is such that the action may be appealed. Such adverse action may consist of the suspension or revocation of a license, the imposition of a fine, and/or any other remedies provided for by this chapter or by law. (3) 660 of 669 Page 6 c. Right of administrative appeal from denial, suspension or revocation of permit or related adverse action. (1) The permit holder or driver shall be notified that he or she may file with the city a written administrative appeal ten working days after delivery of the notice of revocation or suspension or the denial of a license, permit, or driver's identification card, the notice of prohibition to operate or the imposition of a fine. The permit holder or driver shall set forth in the appeal the reasons why such action is not proper. Thereafter, the procedure for the appeal shall be as set forth in Chapter 1.42. (2) If no administrative appeal is filed within the proper time, the permit or driver's identification card shall be considered revoked, suspended or denied, and shall be surrendered, the fine be imposed, as applicable, or the notice of prohibition to operate take effect. (3) Except as provided in subsection (A)(8)(c)(4) of this section, once an administrative appeal is filed, the revocation or suspension of the permit or driver's identification card, the effect of the notice of prohibition to operate, or the imposition of the fine shall be stayed pending the final determination of the administrative appeal. (4) If, in the city's determination, the continued operation of a for -hire vehicle or possession of a driver's identification card and permit represents an unsafe condition for any passenger or pedestrian, the revocation or suspension of the related permit, driver's identification card, or the effect of any notice of prohibition to operate, shall not be stayed. A revocation or suspension of a permit imposed for failure to comply is rebuttably presumed to represent an unsafe condition pending the determination of the appeal or the correction of the violation, whichever shall occur first. Notwithstanding, no medallion shall be reaffixed to a vehicle until the violation has been corrected. d. No permit holder shall employ as a driver or operator any person whose privilege to operate a for -hire vehicle within the city has expired, or has been revoked, denied, suspended, or prohibited by the city or the San Diego County sheriff. e. For violations of this chapter, the city may apply the general penalty provisions set forth in Chapter 1.20 of this code, or the procedures and fines set forth in Chapter 1.44 of this code, in lieu of the revocation or suspension of a permit or identification card authorized by this subsection. B. Limited Permits. 1. The city may approve permits which are limited in duration of time and geographical location. In addition to the requirements for a regular permit, applicants for limited permits must also submit all relevant information as set forth in the implementation regulations for paratransit vehicles, and shall state specifically the appropriate times and locations. 2. Operating pursuant to a limited permit shall also follow the requirements set forth in the implementation regulations for paratransit vehicles. (Ord. 2256 (part), 2004) 11.70.040 - Equipment. A. Inspections. 1. Annual Inspections. Before a for -hire vehicle is placed in service and at least annually thereafter, the for -hire vehicle shall be delivered to a place designated by the city for inspection. City inspectors or their agents or designees shall inspect the for -hire vehicle and its equipment to ascertain whether the vehicle complies with the provisions of the implementation regulations for paratransit vehicles. Failure to produce the vehicle for inspection shall be cause for suspension or revocation of the permit for such vehicle. In the alternative, timely proof of concurrent annual Page 7 661 of 669 inspection and compliance with safety standards by MTBD inspectors shall satisfy this requirement. 2. Periodic Inspections. Any city inspector, MTBD inspector, or peace officer, after displaying proper identification, may make reasonable and periodic inspections of any for -hire vehicle operating under a city permit for the purpose of determining whether the vehicle is in compliance with the provisions of this chapter. 3. Failed Inspections. Any for -hire vehicle which fails to meet the requirements of the California Vehicle Code or this section after inspection may be immediately ordered out -of -service by a city inspector, an MTBD inspector, or a peace officer if it is unsafe for service, until such time as the defect is cured. Ordering a vehicle out -of -service does not constitute a suspension or revocation of the permit but the medallion may be ordered removed by the city until such time as the defect is cured and proof of such supplied to the city upon the vehicle's reinspection. 4. Out -of -Service. In the event that a for -hire vehicle for which a permit has been approved is taken out -of -service for equipment defects, the permit holder may utilize a spare for -hire vehicle which has been duly inspected by a city inspector, an MTBD inspector, or a peace officer, and approved prior to use. The permit holder must immediately inform the city when a spare for -hire vehicle is in use and the location of the disabled vehicle. The spare vehicle will be issued a "spare vehicle" sticker which must be affixed to the left rear portion of the for -hire vehicle for which it is approved, in plain view from the rear of the for -hire vehicle. The permit holder may utilize one spare for -hire vehicle for a period not to exceed sixty days. This subsection shall not be construed, nor deemed to replace, those provisions in this chapter which apply to the transfer of a permit for a for -hire vehicle. (Ord. 2256 (part), 2004) 11.70.050 - Vehicle contents and driver appearance requirements. Driver appearance and vehicle content requirements are set forth in the implementing regulations for paratransit vehicles and are required in order to operate with a valid permit. Failure to comply with the content requirements subject the vehicle to being ordered out of service until compliance is demonstrated to the city. (Ord. 2256 (part), 2004) 11.70.060 - Radio services regulations. Radio services are required in order to operate taxicabs or LSVs. Radio service regulations are set forth in the city's implementing regulations for paratransit vehicles and are required in order to operate. Failure to comply with radio service requirements subject the vehicle to being ordered out of service until compliance is demonstrated to the city. The city may, at any time, revoke or suspend the taxicab or LSV privileges or fine any person, partnership, corporation, association, other organization providing radio or other dispatch service that violates a provision of these regulations or this chapter. (Ord. 2256 (part), 2004) 11.70.070 - Operating documentation requirements. A. Every person engaged in the business of operating a for -hire vehicle within the city under a city permit shall maintain all of the following: 1. Financial records in accordance with good accounting practices; 2. Proof of ownership of the permit and vehicle; Page 8 662 of 669 3. General Operating Records. Operating records shall include, but are not limited to, the following: a. Typed or written dispatch records for taxicab or LSV companies which operate their own radio dispatch service, b. Any Togs which a for -hire vehicle driver maintains describing the trips carried by a for -hire vehicle other than a taxicab, c. Copies of the daily trip log required by taxicab or LSV drivers under implementing regulations for paratransit vehicles, and d. Any other similar records designated in the implementation regulations for paratransit vehicles; 4. A valid California driver's license; 5. Insurance. It is unlawful to operate a for -hire vehicle unless the permit holder establishes and maintains in effect proof of financial responsibility and insurance as specified in the implementation regulations for paratransit vehicles; 6. Ownership records, as specified in the implementation regulations for paratransit vehicles; 7. Business Information. The permit holder shall maintain and keep updated their business address, mailing address where they can accept mail directed to their company, and a business telephone in working order which must be answered during normal business hours, Monday through Friday, and during all hours of operation. The permit holder shall, in the case of any change in their business address, mailing address, or business telephone, notify the city in writing of such change within forty-eight hours of the effective date of this change. (Ord. 2256 (part), 2004) 11.70.080 - Driver's identification card. A. No person shall drive or operate any for -hire vehicle under the authority of a permit granted under this chapter unless such person has and displays a valid driver's identification card obtained annually through the San Diego County sheriff. B. No permit holder shall employ as a for -hire vehicle driver or operator any person who has not obtained or maintained a for -hire vehicle driver's identification card through the San Diego County sheriff. C. The city may recommend that the San Diego County sheriff suspend, revoke, or deny a driver's identification card on the basis of a violation of law or of this chapter. (Ord. 2256 (part), 2004) 11.70.090 - Other requirements and prohibitions. A. The driver of any for -hire vehicle shall promptly obey all lawful orders or instructions of any peace officer, fire fighter, city inspector, or MTDB inspector. B. No driver of any for -hire vehicle shall transport any greater number of persons, including the driver, than the manufacturer's rated seating capacity for the vehicle. C. It is unlawful for any person to solicit business for a for -hire vehicle by making a contract or agreement with any owner of any hotel, apartment house, motel, inn, rental units, restaurant, or bar, or with the agent or employees of such owner, by which the owner, agent or employee receives any type of payment or commission for recommending or directing any passenger to a specific for -hire vehicle or company. It is unlawful for any permit holder, association, or driver to have or make a contract or agreement with any owner of any hotel, apartment house, motel, inn, rental units, restaurant, or bar, or with the agents or employees of such owner, by which the permit holder, association or driver Page 9 663 of 669 receives any type of payment or commission for recommending or directing any passenger to an establishment operated by a specific owner. D. The driver of a for -hire vehicle shall wear, in a manner clearly visible on their person, an identification card approved by the city. E. The driver of a for -hire vehicle shall affix to the vehicle, in a location clearly visible to passengers, a notice providing the telephone number for reporting complaints. F. For -hire vehicles shall comply with the California Vehicle Code and not impede traffic. For -hire vehicle drivers, including taxicabs, shall not load or unload passengers in traffic lanes. G. Except for nonemergency medical vehicle drivers, all drivers must successfully complete an MTDB or city approved driver training course concerning driver courtesy and professionalism, and pass a corresponding qualification examination. H. Any driver employed to transport passengers to a definite point shall take the most direct route possible that will carry the passenger to his destination safely and expeditiously. I. It is unlawful for the driver or operator of any for -hire vehicle to refuse a prospective or actual fare or to take any action to actively discourage a prospective or actual fare on the basis of race, creed, color, age, sex, national origin, disability, or for any other reason, unless it shall be readily apparent that the prospective or actual fare is a hazard to the driver or operator. Rude or abusive language directed to a passenger(s) or any physical action that a reasonable person would construe as threatening or intimidating shall be specifically defined as a violation of this section. 1. A driver, however, is not obligated to transport any person who is verbally or otherwise abusive to the driver. Such incidents shall be reported immediately to a peace officer or any city official charged with the administration of this chapter. 2. Failure of the driver of any taxicab or LSV to assist a passenger with the loading or unloading of a reasonable size, number, and kind of passenger luggage or other items, when requested to do so, shall be specifically defined as a violation of this section. A driver is not required to lift any single piece of passenger luggage or other item that exceeds twenty-five pounds in weight. The requirement for loading or unloading assistance shall be limited to retrieval from or deposit onto the nearest curbside adjacent to the legally parked taxicab or LSV. A sign in the form of a transparent decal may be affixed to the rear -door, side window stating that, "DRIVER IS NOT REQUIRED TO LOAD LUGGAGE IN EXCESS OF 25 POUNDS PER ITEM OR OF A SIZE OR KIND THAT WILL NOT SAFELY FIT IN THE DESIGNATED LUGGAGE AREA OF THIS VEH ICLE." 3. A driver with a lawful disability that prevents him or her from handling items as defined in subsection (I)(2) of this section, upon submission of proof of such disability, relieved of responsibility for the requirements of subsection (I)(2) of this section. A driver so situated may affix a small sign either in the passenger section of the vehicle to be clearly visible to a rear seat passenger or on the inside of the trunk cover lid stating that, "DRIVER HAS DISABILITY THAT PREVENTS HANDLING OF LUGGAGE." J. It is unlawful for taxicab operators to refuse or discourage a prospective or actual fare based upon trip length within the city. A LSV, however, may refuse a prospective or actual fare if the trip distance is outside allowed areas of operations. K. No driver shall stop, park or otherwise leave standing a for -hire vehicle within one hundred feet of any other taxicab or LSV except in a marked taxi/LSV stand or while actively loading or unloading passengers. L. An out -of -service sign must be displayed when the for -hire vehicle is not available for hire and is being operated or is lawfully parked for purposes of maintenance, inspection, or personal use. The sign must be placed in a location in the vehicle that is clearly visible from the exterior of the vehicle. The sign must be of durable material and written in block letters in black ink and easily readable from a distance of not less than ten feet. Page 10 664 of 669 M. It is unlawful for the driver to seek passengers by stopping at or driving slowly in the vicinity of an entertainment center or transportation center or any other location of public gathering, in such a manner as to interfere with public access to, or departure from, that center or location, or so as to interfere with or impede traffic. N. It is unlawful for a for -hire vehicle driver, having parked and left their vehicle, to solicit patronage among pedestrians on the sidewalk, or at any entertainment center, transportation center, or other location of public gathering. O. It is unlawful to respond to a call for service dispatched to another operator except when an LSV refers service to another operator because the trip distance is outside of the approved area of jurisdiction. P. Nonemergency medical vehicle drivers shall acquire and maintain valid proof of proper first -aid and CPR training. Q. Jitney Vehicles. 1. In order to qualify as a jitney vehicle, the driver must comply with the implementation regulations for paratransit vehicles, pertinent to the jitney requirements. 2. It is unlawful for a jitney vehicle to operate a fixed route service on other than that route designated by the city. (Ord. 2256 (part), 2004) 11.70.100 - Fares. A. The driver shall offer each passenger a receipt upon payment of the fare. The receipt shall accurately show the date, the amount of the fare, the medallion number, the trade name, and the name and signature of the driver. B. All disputes to fare shall be determined by the peace officer, or city official charged with the administration of this chapter, who is most readily available where the dispute is had. It is unlawful for any person to fail or refuse to comply with such determination by the peace officer or city official. C. It is unlawful for any person to refuse to pay the lawful fare of a for -hire vehicle after employing or hiring the same. D. Rates. 1. The city shall set for itself or adopt the rates MTDB establishes as a maximum rate of fare for exclusive ride and group ride hire of for -hire vehicles except for trips from Lindbergh Field International Airport. No permit holder shall exceed such rate in the conduct of its operations. A permit holder may petition the city for any desired change in the maximum taxicab or LSV rates for exclusive ride and/or zone rates and group ride hire. 2. Taxicab trips from Lindbergh Field International Airport shall be at a uniform rate of fare established by the San Diego Regional Airport Authority. 3. Within thirty calendar days following the issuance of a permit, each permit holder shall file with the city the rates of fare that they will charge, which shall not exceed the maximum rate set by the city. If a permit holder desires to change the rates of fare being charged for such services during any calendar year, they shall first file a document with the city indicating said changes, and no change shall be effective until fourteen calendar days following the filing of such change. E. Taxicabs. 1. Each taxicab permit holder shall set the taximeter for the rate that they will charge and have the taximeter sealed and inspected. 2. Each taxicab permit holder shall prominently post rates in dollars -per -mile centered on the upper third part of both rear doors one inch in height, utilizing "Universal" or other city preapproved font Page 11 665 of 669 in black or white lettering, to produce maximum contrast and adequately spaced for maximum readability. 3. If a taxicab permit holder desires to change their rates of fare, they shall file with the city the new rates not to exceed the city's allowable maximum, reset the taximeter, have the taximeter sealed and inspected, and post the revised rates on each side of the taxicab. F. Charter Vehicles. The rates of fare for a charter vehicle shall be established by a prearranged written contract on a per mile or per hour basis. G. Sightseeing Vehicles. The rate of fare for sightseeing vehicles shall be established on a per capita or per event basis. H. Nonemergency Medical Vehicles. 1. The rate of fare for exclusive ride service of nonemergency medical vehicles shall be established on a per capita plus per mile basis. 2. The rates of fare for shared ride service shall be established on a per capita plus per mile basis, or on a per capita plus per zone basis. I. Jitney Vehicles. The rates of fare shall be established on a per capita basis. J. LSVs. The city shall establish and authorize the use of zones of operation. All vehicles permitted as LSV may use two methods of seeking compensation, either by zone rates or on a prearranged contract on a per mile or per hour basis. Either method may be used when working inside of an approved zone. However, when operating on a prearranged charter basis, within an approved zone, no operator may exceed the maximum number of vehicles that have medallions. K. It is unlawful for any permit holder and/or driver of a for -hire vehicle to demand of a passenger a charge for hire which is greater than the current maximum rate approved by the city, or that is greater than the permit holder's meter rate filed with the city. L. Nothing in this section shall preclude a permit holder or driver from agreeing with a prospective passenger to a rate of fare which is less than the permit holder's filed and posted rates of fare, if the agreement is entered into in advance of the passenger's hiring the taxicab for the trip, except for trips commencing at the Lindbergh Field International Airport. (Ord. 2256 (part), 2004) 11.70.110 - Regulatory fees. A. Rates. The city shall charge regulatory fees to affect the full cost recovery of activities associated with the administration, regulation, issuance or transfer of for -hire vehicle permits, inspections, and associated document administration. Such fees shall be established in amounts determined from time to time by resolution of the city council. B. Changes. Changes in fee schedules affecting permits shall be mailed to all permit holders. Changes shall be effective thirty calendar days thereafter. (Ord. 2256 (part), 2004) 11.70.120 - Stands —Authority to designate. The city council is authorized to designate stands for the use of for -hire vehicles at various locations throughout the city. (Ord. 2256 (part), 2004) Page 12 666 of 669 11.70.130 - General provisions. A. Severability. If any section, sentence, clause or phrase of this chapter is for any reason held to be invalid or unconstitutional by a decision of any court of competent jurisdiction, such decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions of this chapter. The city council hereby declares that it would have passed this chapter and adopted the ordinance codified in this chapter and each section, sentence, clause or phrase thereof, irrespective of the fact that any one or more sections, subsections, sentences, clauses or phrases be declared invalid or unconstitutional. (Ord. 2256 (part), 2004) 11.70.140 - Violations. It is unlawful for any person to violate any provision or fail to comply with any of the requirements of this chapter or of the implementation regulations for paratransit vehicles. (Ord. 2256 (part), 2004) 667 of 669 Page 13 CC/CDC-HA Agenda 10/18/2016 — Page 668 The following page(s) contain the backup material for Agenda Item: Report on Joint Meeting/Workshop of the City of National City City Council and Planning Commission Scheduled for November 1, 2016 at 4:00 pm to provide a status report on the update of the Downtown Specific Plan. (Planning) 668 of 669 Item # October 18, 2016 Report on Joint Meeting/Workshop of the City of National City City Council and Planning Commission Scheduled for November 1, 2016 at 4:00 pm to provide a status report on the update of the Downtown Specific Plan (Planning) 669 of 669