Motion filed to remove 25 mile rule from Prop 203

Some might say such a motion is a last grasp attempt by Compassion Club owners who will all be out of business if this 25 mile rule is not removed from the law. Perhaps. Or perhaps it’s just unconstitutional and needs to be removed because it’s wrong?

Begin news release>>

Today a ‘motion for a preliminary injunction and memorandum of law in support thereof’ was filed in the United States District Court for the district of Arizona which will send the Arizona Medical Marijuana Act back to Federal Court. The lawsuit, HAYES vs ARIZONA has Governor Brewer named  along side the Director of the Arizona Department of Health Services Will Humble and Robert Halliday who is the director of the Arizona Department of Public Safety as well as Tom Horne the Arizona Attorney General. The Plaintiff is listed as Billy Hayes, the Co-Founder and former CEO of Arizona Cannabis Society, local medical marijuana advocate and also a well known medical marijuana cultivation consultant. The case itself is claiming a small portion of the Arizona Medical Marijuana Act (AMMA) is unconstitutional, the section in question is being referred to as the “25 Mile Rule” and Hayes is looking to have it removed from the Law.

“comes now, one Pro Se…and hereby moves the court to preliminary enjoin enforcement of Arizona Revised Statute 36-2804.02 (A)(3)(f) and preserve the status quo with respect to that portion of the Arizona Medical Marijuana Act that allows for cultivation of Medical Marijuana…”

The case alleges the above listed section of the AMMA interferes with Federal Equal Protection under the 14th Amendment to the United States Constitution and as such should be stricken from the AMMA, no other portion of the AMMA is being challenged.

This lawsuit against the state is like nothing we have seen as of yet regarding the implementation of the AMMA, as it a single patient challenging the State, regarding just a single section of the AMMA but don’t be confused, this little section is enormous in nature. The portion of the law being challenged has been the source of much controversy since the implementation of the Arizona Medical Marijuana Act and Hayes has sat in the background watching and listening to it all.

“I have a unique position in the industry as a cultivation consultant, I actually see what people are growing, how they’re growing it and the benefits they get from cultivating cannabis. It goes farther than just the obvious financial benefits for patients that choose to grow their own cannabis, it goes a lot farther.”


Arizona Cannabis Society first appeared as a cultivation force in an article by Ray Stern from the New Times, in another New Times article you can find images of Hayes smoking a large joint, his mmj card was also used in an article by Ray Stern and the New Times  regarding Arizona’s medical marijuana act and its implementation, or lack there of.  A video of Hayes speaking out against cultivation restrictions at a Town of Gilbert Planning & Zoning meeting can also be found on the city’s official website. Advocacy aside, he was also recently featured in THC Revista, an Argentinian cannabis cultivation magazine, the magazine which is riddled with photos of hydroponic systems and gorgeous marijuana plants. A significant number of those photos have Hayes’ name attached. Hayes definitely knows how to cultivate cannabis and that could be important in this case, as the words “ORAL ARGUMENT REQUESTED” are in bold across the front of the motion.


The case is no small matter by any means and Hayes is taking it very seriously. The law currently states that if/when a dispensary opens its doors within 25 miles of the patient, that patient will no longer be authorized to cultivate medical marijuana upon renewal of their medical marijuana registry card.
Hayes is looking to change that portion of the law, well, “remove” it is a better way to say it, he wants it axed and he is willing to go into the federal court system to try. He is potentially implicating himself in activity that is still considered a federal crime, so that every patient in Arizona has a choice as to where, and how their medication is produced. Marijuana madman, Arizona medical marijuana  martyr, legal genius, truth is only time will tell us which one of these Hayes is, time and a federal judge.

In an interview with Hayes that was done just prior to his filing the case, we asked some of the more obvious questions, for example, ‘why would you want to possibly delay the dispensaries any longer than they already have been, if, your advocating for yourself as well as potentially all of the patients in Arizona as this decision could affect them all.’
Hayes replied quite matter of factly “I have heard this section of the law discussed at every single meeting, industry function, industry event, you name it, it was obvious something needed to be done to try and protect AMMA patients and talking was getting us nowhere.”

When we asked him why he choose to wait until now to file the lawsuit he said “It had to be perfect, the lawsuit that is. I will only get one chance at this lawsuit so it has to be done carefully, it had to be done correctly. Representing yourself pro se against the State is never an easy task, you have to have all your ducks in a row before you step in through those courtroom doors.”

During the interview we asked why Robert Halliday is listed in the lawsuit, Hayes responded “it’s his job to direct the DPS employees below him to do the background checks, verify registry cards, issue criminal citations and arrest suspected offenders of violations of the AMMA. I tried to limit who was named and he unfortunately had to be on that list, he took an oath to defend my Constitutional Rights and is in charge of many others that did the same. It is very important these individuals understand clearly what those new ‘rights’ under the law are.”

The magnitude of this case is hard to grasp at first, start with every business that is involved at this point or potentially could be. The dispensaries stand to lose their monopoly of the Arizona Medical Marijuana Act by loosing control of 99% of all the cultivation in the state according to Hayes. Many of the “grow shops” that opened and are flourishing during Arizona’s green rush would be forced to close, many of the caregivers would no longer be able to supply their patients with “home grown” medicine and this directly effects these stores economically.

There are literally dozens of legitimate ancillary businesses and business models that would be forced to close due to lack of customer base. Patients would lose their ability to choose how their medicine was produced, and caregivers would lose their ability to produce it. Marijuana Testing facilities would lose a tremendous amount of potential business, processing facilities such as medicinal cannabis bakeries, commercial kitchens that are family owned and operated would lose thousands of potential patient clients. Even businesses being developed to dispose of the “controlled substance” aka unusable marijuana which by law must be incinerated would have no chance of developing successful businesses operations.

Now businesses aside, there are currently over 19,000 mmj patients in the state of Arizona, and over 16,500 of them are “approved to cultivate” by AZDHS. These patients stand a lot to lose considering everyone of those patients was presented with a choice to cultivate or not to cultivate when they applied through the AZDHS registry system to receive their medical marijuana card.

The “status quo” according to Hayes has clearly been established in regards to the AMMA and the stack of signed statements he already has appears to back up his claims.

Early I mentioned Hayes and his appearance at the Gilbert P&Z meeting, he was there representing the patients that were already cultivating or had intentions of cultivating their own medical marijuana who were facing massive restrictions from the Town of Gilbert. I watched the meeting, several times, although it only took one time to see and hear the impact Hayes had on the Planning and Zoning Commission and their decision to scrap pretty much everything on the table regarding restrictions against patients. In fact he attended meetings all over Arizona, almost everyone of those meetings ended with a similar result, very little if any restrictions against patients wishing to cultivate.

I have also seen Hayes at meetings advocating for dispensaries as well, which to some may seem a bit odd considering he is filing a lawsuit that could deal quite a financial blow to dispensaries if he wins. Hayes was the acting CEO of Arizona Cannabis Society until recently when he resigned and designated the current CFO as the new acting CEO of the very company he founded. Arizona Cannabis Society (AZCS) has made public intentions of submitting multiple applications to operate dispensaries in Arizona, so why would the Founder and former CEO file a lawsuit that could potentially take away AZCS’s and every other dispensary owners hand in the AZ mmj monopoly game?

If you ask Hayes he’ll tell you, “Our Constitution and our Rights are being legislated and executive ordered away almost daily at this point, we need to stand up for people’s rights regardless of how it effects us economically, we’re all in this boat together and it’s going to sink if we don’t start plugging these holes being carved into our constitutional rights.”

Hayes seems well versed in Constitutional as well as State Law and his knowledge of cannabis cultivation would undoubtedly overwhelm anyone the state could offer during the “ORAL ARGUMENT REQUESTED” by Hayes in his motion. It would seem the State is up against a very formidable opponent in a fight that could change the entire face of the AMMA.  

One thing that could work in the plaintiff’s favor is the Judge that will be presiding over the case, the Honorable Judge Susan Bolton will be hearing the case and oral argument if the case makes it that far. Judge Bolton’s name should be very familiar with most of us by now. Arizona’s SB1070 was shredded by Judge Bolton on the very same grounds Hayes is requesting a preliminary injunction and memorandum of law on, constitutionality.


From Judgepedia:

Judge Bolton dismissed a lawsuit on January 4, 2012 filed by Arizona claiming a state law passed by voters in 2010 that legalized medical-marijuana put state workers at risk for federal prosecution and imprisonment due to conflict with federal drug law. Arizona Governor Jan Brewer, who opposed the measure, had sought to block the creation of marijuana dispensaries allowed by the law – claiming that state employees charged with regulating the dispensaries were at risk for federal prosecution. Bolton ruled that the state had not established a “genuine threat of imminent prosecution” and dismissed the case.

A spokesman for Governor Brewer’s office expressed great disappointment over the ruling. Joe Yuhas, spokesman for the Arizona Medical Marijuana Association, said of the ruling “We would hope that our state leaders will now recognize it is time to stop wasting taxpayer dollars in an effort to thwart the will of the voters and move ahead with full implementation of the initiative.”


Arizona counter-suit

On October 21, 2011, Judge Bolton dismissed a lawsuit filed by Governor Jan Brewer against the federal government. The lawsuit was filed as a counter-suit to the one filed by the Justice Department challenging Arizona’s immigration law. In her suit, Gov. Brewer claimed that the federal government was not doing enough to protect the state form illegal immigration. Judge Bolton dismissed the suit saying that Gov. Brewer’s charges were political questions not appropriate for a court to decide. In addition, Judge Bolton said that some of the state’s claims must be thrown out because they were answered in a 1994 court case in Arizona and cannot be litigated again.

Judge Bolton wrote, “While Arizona may disagree with the established enforcement priorities, Arizona’s allegations do not give rise to a claim that the counter-defendants (the federal government) have abdicated their statutory responsibilities.”

Arizona immigration law (S.B. 1070)

The United States Department of Justice took the state of Arizona to court in order to stop its bill on immigration from taking effect July 29, 2010. In the ruling, Bolton upheld parts of the law, while striking down some of its more controversial aspects.

In summary, parts of the law that were upheld:

  • The state can restrict local officials from creating “sanctuary city” policies that limit enforcement of the law;
  • Arizona state officials will work with the federal government on illegal immigration;
  • and it is a crime to employ day laborers, often illegal immigrants that wait for work in public areas.

Parts of the law blocked by the decision:

The state cannot criminalize individuals for failing to have alien registration papers on them;
Arizona cannot authorize “the warrantless arrest of a person” if law officials believe she or he is in the county illegally.
The state of Arizona appealed the ruling in the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit. The Ninth Circuit upheld Bolton’s ruling on April 1, 2011.
Read the Ninth Circuit opinion here: USA v. State of Arizona


           ” In fact Hayes makes several mentions of the history of the Federal Court regarding the dissection of laws that are in partial unconstitutional while leaving the remaining portions intact. In Arizona’s latest medical-marijuana lawsuit on page 10 you’ll find the now famous SB1070 ruling by Judge Bolton from United States v. Arizona, 703 F. Supp. 2D 980, 1008 (D. Ariz.2010) On page 11 of Hayes’ motion we find, “it appears clear that the prevailing trend is that a federal Court should not invalidate more of a statute than necessary” and this statement appears to be very true. For all intensive purposes it seems, at least at face value Hayes and his legal team have put together a solid motion that will go before the court.”

21 comments for “Motion filed to remove 25 mile rule from Prop 203

  1. Jamaal Tinsley
    February 16, 2012 at 5:57 pm

    This man is smarter than Tom Horne, Sheriff Joe, Russell Pearce, Will Humble, and Jan Brewery put together.

  2. Bill Hayes
    February 16, 2012 at 10:33 pm

    Last ditch effort? AZCS is prepared to enter multiple dispensary applications. AZCS is not and never was a compassion club. We simply created the model.

    FACT: AZCS is the ONLY dispensary applicant in CHAA 53 that has been fully approved by the city and ready and waiting on dhs.

    If you followed AZCS a little closer you would quickly see we are closer to CFCC in business model, in fact checking the inception dates clears that up as well.

    you know “chicken or the egg?”

    this has nothing to do with money, this is about “rights”

  3. Gerald
    February 17, 2012 at 8:21 am

    I personally like how the guys at AZCS shit on everyone and won’t do a damn thing for anybody and then when they need some help they take to Facebook peddling for everyone to support their latest movement.

    Think about it. This Bill Hayes guy took it upon himself to file this lawsuit PRO SE. Which means he did not even think it through enough to hire an attorney. Most everything in his lawsuit is copy and pasted from other lawsuits he found online.

    If he REALLY wanted anything more than his name in lights he would have gotten together with these organizations he supposedly now wants help from and they would have filed this in the correct manner. As a group, with an attorney, as a movement. But alas, its the Bill Hayes show. A convicted felon who has no right to a Dispensary and is 100% trying to keep the Compassion Club model going.

    Shame on this blog for giving him a platform so large to stand on! I thought you guys knew better since the whole Al Sobol fiasco.

    • Bill Hayes
      February 17, 2012 at 10:57 am

      Shame on you Gerald.

      “AZCS shit on everybody and wont do a damn thing” REALLY?!

      Where are the photos from your record breaking food drive? Our pics are on facebook.

      Where are the photos of your Toy Drive during Christmas? Our pics are on facebook.

      Where were you when people, patients had no one to speak for them in Gilbert? I was there, I spoke for them.

      Next, lets look at Pro Se and what it entitles me to, not what restrictions you believe it places upon me. An Attorney has a “duty and oath to the court” NOT to try Google, Youtube or buy yourself a copy of Black’s Law 9th Edition and start learning.

      You say everything is a “cut and paste” from another lawsuit, have you ever written a motion before Gerald? I have, successful ones. And yes Cornell Law Library, and Google are great tools for building a motion. It’s how things are done in a court. Those copy and pastes are portions of cases, some in Arizona, like SB1070 which establishes “relevance” for things like standing, jurisdiction, etc. and are REQUIRED if you have a prayer of not being shot down or prolonged with rebuttals form the State. I have a legal team, hand picked, we’re fine there ;)

      I have NEVER done anything to “get my name in lights” and the mere fact that I waited this long to file proves my intentions are not for media attention. AZCS has never run paid advertising, ever. AZCS got where it is without the “name in lights” without the media coverage like AL and Gerald Gaines have used in the past.

      Last, but not least. You truly showed your ignorance with this comment “A convicted felon who has no right to a Dispensary and is 100% trying to keep the Compassion Club model going.”

      AZCS is NOT a compassion club and NEVER has been. I despise what this industry has done to those words “compassion club” and I opened the FIRST compassion club here, ACC, ask Nick.

      We “supported” other compassion clubs until several months ago when we made that public statement dissolving all working relationships in the industry. It got out of hand, 2811 over charging, ACC over charging, everybody was jacking prices up.
      We opened AZCS on our own, with no financial help from anyone, no support from anyone in the industry. People bad mouthing us because we couldn’t afford to pay for booths at their events, stupid high school shit spawned by people like yourself, more mouth than ear even though the apparent physical ratio suggests otherwise. While everyone else was showing their true colors AZCS was showing theirs by having the lowest costs in the valley with the most legal option for patients. So legal Gerald Gaines modeled his business after it, you know what they say about imitation and flattery right?!
      That “felony” you want to discuss is for “marijuana possession/victimless crime, class 6 felony” get it straight if your going to talk about it. You in fact completely missed the fact that my felony, the other one reads “cultivation” in the headlines. Both of which are considered “excluded felonies” under the AMMA.
      I have just as much “right” to a dispensary as anyone else, if not more. I’m not just some business man looking to make a quick buck, I’m am here first and foremost as a patient and caregiver, always have been, always will be.

      Arizona Cannabis Society WILL put in MULTIPLE applications for MULTIPLE dispensary locations in Arizona. Bank on the fact that this is not a “last ditch effort” to save the compassion club businesses, rather it is in fact an attempt to change a portion of the AMMA that I hear a LOT of patients unhappy with, nothing more. I have publicly spoken out against what many of the “compassion clubs” are/were doing. There are a great many businesses and organizations that stand to benefit from what I am doing while in return I stand to lose the most out of everyone.

      tell me again how this is all about me?

      • Bulldog
        March 7, 2012 at 10:45 am

        Dont get so upset. That was just a guy who has bought into Al Sobols crap. Al is pushing for dispensaries because he now is trying to convince people that he knows all the laws and can help them get on opened. There are a lot us us behind you and I will support you anyway I can. There have been a lot of businesses open up in the state for growing and I would hate to see all those jobs go away. So many people have spent a lot of moeny on items to grow at home they could not aford to pay 20.00 a gram for Als shit. Keep fighting the good fight and know guys like me are behind you 100%.

        June 7, 2013 at 10:27 am


    • Mary
      February 17, 2012 at 4:15 pm

      You mean how they (Arizona Cannabis Society) were charging people $350-400 for an ounce for the past year and now they want to act like they are doing everything for the patients pro bono?

      Or how every single time they post anywhere online they are plugging their forum that makes you send them a copy of your card so they can keep hundreds of patients on file in case they ever get busted?

      Or how they make you sign over your grow rights to buy meds from them and still won’t give you free meds? YES THAT HAPPENED TO ME.

      AZCS is all about smoke and mirrors. They are all about profit but they talk a great game. Greatest.

      Gerald (if you’re the Gerald I assume you are), you’re no better and more than likely you will be getting arrested soon for your latest little publicity stunt.

      All you opportunistic frauds are not really for the patients, you are for the paychecks.

      Now get ready for an angry rebuttal with undoubtedly many links posting to their forums where they can control every word said. I encourage the admin on this site to not allow all that backlinking as they are doing it to build members no doubt.

      • AZCS PR Dept
        February 17, 2012 at 6:29 pm

        Our facts and history speaks for itself, we are very public, very transparent. Sorry if you had a bad experience with us. We do require you assign us “agency rights” to assist with your cultivation. There are costs associated with producing the medication, you are required to cover those costs plus the operating costs of the Collective, as a collective member. We do not take your grow rights. Your grow rights, by the way are “worth nothing” even when dispensaries do open you cannot be reimbursed in any manner, with or with out a caregiver. The grow rights have no value under the current law, HAYES v ARIZONA would in fact change that very aspect of the law. It would allow for individuals that cannot afford the cost or convenience of a dispensary the option to use a caregiver or grow it themselves.

        He is cutting his own throat, to help the very people that bash him every chance they get, irony at its finest folks.

        If Bill wins HAYES vs ARIZONA he essentially releases the medical marijuana monopoly stranglehold over cultivation.

        This was actually addressed between Bill and DHS long ago, having prices that were similar but slightly lower than street value to deter the “re-sale” of dispensary meds on the black market to non card-holders, DHS approved, prices were established and Bill has done as he promised, lowered them and started offering incentives. The CFO approved the change, done.

        Look, whether you like Bill or not, he is ALL YOU GOT right now and he is trying to fight for you, he stands NOTHING TO GAIN from this lawsuit other than publicity he isn’t even a fan of.

  4. Randy
    February 17, 2012 at 10:28 am

    I find it interesting that one would criticize and presume things about someone that is laying it on the line for growers. Sounds like you have a better plan, so you should try that out. In the meantime, it is clear you dislike Bill Hayes…so that in turn means you should not support his attempts to change one small aspect of the law; one that has no bearing on your dispensary application, etc. whatsoever? I’ll give you the benefit of the doubt and assume it is simply jealousy…maybe someone feels hurt they weren’t included. Either way, you are the one that looks to be lacking in compassion and only in it for the money. So much talk in this industry and no action. Then when someone acts, other members of the industry that should unite post up this garbage. Good luck to you making your millions off the industry and crying foul about anything you didn’t directly participate in. You should call the Governor and let her know you want to help draft the State’s response. In the meantime, I’ll be sure to steer clear of your establishment if you end up getting a dispensary as it is clear that you are totally confused by what the lawsuit is even about or I suspect you wouldn’t criticize in the way you have.

  5. Dan
    February 17, 2012 at 10:36 am

    Build more fuel!

  6. Bill Hayes
    February 17, 2012 at 11:00 am

    Next, lets look at Pro Se and what it entitles me to, not what restrictions you believe it places upon me. An Attorney has a “duty and oath to the court” NOT* to try Google, Youtube or buy yourself a copy of Black’s Law 9th Edition and start learning.

    *NOT TO THE CLIENT, try Google…

    sorry, sticky fingers ;)

  7. Bill Hayes
    February 17, 2012 at 11:02 am

    man, I wish there was an edit button, sorry admins. Apparently the link didn’t make it either…


  8. Zack
    February 17, 2012 at 12:06 pm

    I for one am grateful and thankful someone is actually doing something about our rights being violated.. Thanks Bill!

  9. February 17, 2012 at 1:59 pm

    Personal attacks on each other serve no purpose here gang. We are all working toward the same cause.

    If folks have personal issues with others please take it to email. or be nostalgic and meet face to face!

  10. February 17, 2012 at 8:37 pm

    This law suit benefits patients and caregivers who grow. Nothing more, nothing less. I for one am for this part of the AMMA. All I would like to see happen in the meantime, is all organizations working together…for once, and stop the bad mouthing. As a grower and considered to be a ‘master grower’, I am here for the patients and fellow growers, whether it be a caregiver or patient. To tell a patient or caregiver that they have to give up their rights to growing their Own medicine, I firmly believe that we should be able to choose from buying from a dispensary, or not. The only cluster f*%# is, if a patient/caregiver gets to keep their rights to grow, that they won’t be regulated on if they grew their 5oz’s a month, and therefore can not buy anything from a dispensary. I know that I woud like to be able to do a ‘pepsi challenge’ on the quality of meds in a dispensary compared to my grow or a clients grow. Some things, like waxes or tinctures, may be something I’d like to get at a shop, just to see the quality and different varieties they may have. Flowers? Well, I of course will be partial to what I can do/grow :) … But, no one is perfect, so I’d like to see what quality is out there for us patients. This part of the AMMA dropped, or amended, will be a great thing. Not as much for the dispensaries, but definitely for patients. Now, if the law can be amended to allow patents and caregivers to help supply dispensaries…would be the Best outcome. This would allow for absolute comfort, all the way around. Of course, personally, I still would want the meds to be lab tested, regardless of who grew it. Lab testing Should be a requirement….Period! Count me in on helping this cause! I am and always will be, for the patient, regardless of me growing for dispensaries, plan on me and my service, Making it Mandatory that Anyone I work with, have their meds being tested, and I will only work with ‘patient passionate’ businesses. Anyways, let’s all work together to get this motion that’s been filed, HAPPEN! Who’s with me? No more bickering about di*k sizes. Stop the bs and stay focused on the cause. To stay informed on these and other MMJ pertinent subjects, come to our monthly public meetings. We will be inviting Bill, and others, to come speak to our membership about what they’re are doing. No fighting, just trading of very valuable information. Visit for info about the whens and where’s of our meetings.
    Much love to all!

  11. Randy
    February 18, 2012 at 8:21 am

    The lawsuit has nothing to do with AZCS as far as I can tell other than Mr. Hayes worked there and they seem to support what he is doing alongside about 99.9% of all other qualified patients. SO, if one had a bad experience with AZCS, I guess that’s their issue, but see it as unproductive toward the 25 mile rule fight that need the unity A.M. speaks of.

    I’ve read the suit, and I’m with AM…stop the BS, unite for once. If nothing else this starts a dialogue that needed to be happening for quite some time. Who screwed who over and who did what in the past serves zero purpose; as does trying to assume “hidden agendas”.

  12. Tessa
    February 23, 2012 at 4:41 pm

    I am a 50yr old women who was previously on 26 medications for over 4 yrs, I slept my life away, until June when my daughter killed herself. I did not use Marijuana for over 30yrs but agains’t all the Drs, saying I would die if I tried to ween myself off of the morphine and codine and 24 other meds. I did not die. But living or should I say not living on $680 a month I have no heat, no cooler in summer, no food by the second week of the month, no TV, no internet, no car, no gas money and damn sure no money for $400 an ounce which I go through now every 2 wks or so. More than I make in SSDI. So tell me I took my savings from my 6 months of back SSDI ( even though it took almost five years to get my SSDI in which I lost my house, car, marriage, children, and basic human dignity while some state idiot without a medical degree turned down 10 yrs of medical records and two years of terminal disease.) and I purchased equipment to grow my own medication. I live in a rural area only 10 homes in 3 miles but within 25miles of town which some rich asshole will open a dispensary and charge street prices and I will be without meds and back on morphine, sleeping my life away. I have invested everything I have to grow my own, I cannot find a rental I can afford anywhere so I will either have to move to like Ashfork (40miles away from Drs, stores etc with no car) or go to jail. And the guy 20 miles away can grow and sell all he wants. The law was to protect and provide people like me. Not to make some rich asshole richer by sucking the life off the poor. One solution… if this law does not change, fuck em. Don’t buy from them, shut them down. There is always a dealer somewhere, if your going to jail anyway. I have no choices, I will never be able to purchase meds, I will never go back on pain pills, I will do what I have to and if they want to pay my 4k a month medical bills in prison then way to go for the tax payers. WE just built a new private prison in Prescott for our children to go for profit. But no money in AZ for the poor and sick. I want in on this law suit PLEASE>

    • Right On
      March 4, 2012 at 10:39 pm

      I completely agree with this ladies assesment of the situation. The 25 mile rule pits patients needs against the States Licensed Dispensaries which will have a monopoly & continue charging outrageous prices for meds!


      Az politicians attempt to thwart the will of the voters which passed this compassionate law, instead of legal challenges, but by pricing it out of reach of those who would truely benifit the most!! A new kind of economic warfare against the poor. If Corporations like Dispensaries are People, & I’m People at a minimum we should have equal & individual rights. Not I surrender mine so you can hold it for me?? (Ps I dont believe the injustice of Corporations are People)

  13. Tessa
    February 23, 2012 at 4:47 pm

    HEY CAN I JOIN THE LAW SUIT PLEASE!!! OR CAN I BE HEARD AS FOR POSSIBLE DAMAGES AGAINST ME AND MY HEALTH AND FREEDOMS. I agree, how can they make me a criminal just because of my location and obviously financial class ( the rich can buy all the land and buildings they want, where they want, when they want, I cannot even find a place to live on $680 a month, forced to rent room with son and ex husband to not be homeless) Really? I don’t know what to do, live next to a sheriff and couldn’t care less, still grow but now, am I even going to apply for my renewal? Why would I bother if I cannot grow as for I cannot afford to pay for my meds.

  14. randy
    April 16, 2012 at 12:10 am

    bless you tessa.
    i feel the same way, no way can i afford to go to dispensaries.
    and then there’s the ridiculous and probably chaa scheme, part of the plot to not let us grow.

  15. randy
    April 16, 2012 at 12:11 am

    that’s ^^probably ‘illegal’ ^^chaa scheme

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *