Medical Marihuana Facilities Licensing Act
This page includes materials from the Michigan State University Extension program ‘Regulating Medical Marijuana Facilities: A Workshop for Local Government’ conducted at various locations around the state during February and March 2017. The materials here include handouts from the workshop and additional research-based, peer-reviewed resources on the topic. Michigan State University does not endorse or oppose medical marijuana.
The materials on this page are provided for educational purposes only. Michigan municipalities should consider this issue in consultation with a diverse group of community stakeholders and a qualified municipal attorney. There is no correct approach to this topic that applies to all municipalities.
A recording of ‘Regulating Medical Marijuana Facilities: A Webinar for Local Government’ from March 30, 2017 will be available for $20 and will be posted online soon.
On this page:
- Michigan Medical Marihuana Facilities Licensing Act
- Sample resolution regarding the Medical Marihuana Facilities Licensing Act
- Sample ordinances regulating medical marijuana facilities
- How local government might proceed with decision-making on the Medical Marihuana Facilities Licensing Act
- Medical Marihuana Facilities Licensing Act: Fact Sheet
- Medical Marihuana Facilities Licensing Act: Q&A Fact Sheet
- New Medical Marijuana Laws Q&A
- The Health Effects of Cannabis and Cannabinoids: The Current State of Evidence and Recommendations for Research
- Dose of Reality: The Effect of State Marijuana Legalizations
Public Act 281 of 2016, being MCL 333.27101 et seq. An act to license and regulate medical marihuana growers, processors, provisioning centers, secure transporters, and safety compliance facilities; to provide for the powers and duties of certain state and local governmental officers and entities; to create a medical marihuana licensing board; to provide for interaction with the statewide monitoring system for commercial marihuana transactions; to create an advisory panel; to provide immunity from prosecution for marihuana-related offenses for persons engaging in marihuana-related activities in compliance with this act; to prescribe civil fines and sanctions and provide remedies; to provide for forfeiture of contraband; to provide for taxes, fees, and assessments; and to require the promulgation of rules.
A sample resolution that makes a record of a municipality’s decision to NOT adopt an ordinance to authorize any medical marihuana facilities as identified in the Medical Marihuana Facilities Licensing Act, PA 281 or 2016. This document is as an example prepared for educational purposes only and is not intended to provide legal advice. You should consult an attorney experienced in municipal law before adopting. This sample resolution, or any portion of it, must be adapted to local circumstances and may need to be updated as laws change. Use of these materials is at the sole risk of the user.
This bulletin provides a sample police power ordinance for authorizing one or more types of medical marijuana facilities in a municipality under the Medical Marihuana Facilities Licensing Act, PA 281 of 2016 and the sample zoning ordinance amendments that could be adopted with it to regulate the location of the facilities and establish standards for approval. This document is an example prepared for educational purposes only and is not intended to provide legal advice. You should consult an attorney experienced in municipal law before adopting any local ordinance. This sample ordinance, or any portion of it, must be adapted to local circumstances and may need to be updated as laws change. Use of these materials is at the sole risk of the user.
How local government might proceed with decision-making on the Medical Marihuana Facilities Licensing Act
A flow chart of considerations, approaches, and decisions for local government. The flowchart suggests that local government officials initiate a conversation in the jurisdiction with a diverse set of stakeholders to hear and assemble the pros and cons of the issue in the community. This flowchart is not a substitute for following the statutorily required process for adopting a zoning ordinance amendment as detailed in the Michigan Zoning Enabling Act, PA 110 of 2006, as amended.
A one-page summary of PA 281 of 2016 written by the law firm Dickinson Wright.
A three-page series of common questions and answers about PA 281 of 2016.
A six-page series of common questions about PA 281, 282, and 283 of 2016 and answers provided by Catherine Mullhaupt, MTA Staff Attorney.
The Health Effects of Cannabis and Cannabinoids: The Current State of Evidence and Recommendations for Research
A summary of conclusions from the full report The Health Effects of Cannabis and Cannabinoids: The Current State of Evidence and Recommendations for Research, developed by an expert, ad hoc committee of the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine that presents nearly 100 conclusions related to the health effects of cannabis and cannabinoid use.
The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact – Vol. 4 (Rocky Mountain High-Intensity Drug Trafficking Area; September 2016)
The purpose of this 2016 report is to document the impact of the legalization of marijuana for medical and recreational use in Colorado. Colorado has served as an experimental lab for the nation to determine the impact of legalizing marijuana. This is an important opportunity to gather and examine data and facts on this issue. Citizens and policymakers should have sufficient data to make an informed decision. This is the fourth annual report on the impact of Colorado legalizing marijuana. It is divided into ten sections with each providing data on the impact of legalization prior to and during the creation of the marijuana industry in Colorado. By Kevin Wong, Chelsey Clarke, and Grady Harlow. A supplement to this report (and others in the series) is available at: http://www.rmhidta.org/default.aspx/MenuItemID/687/MenuGroup/RMHIDTAHome.htm
This paper assesses recent marijuana legalizations and related policies in Colorado, Washington, Oregon, and Alaska. It provides a systematic evaluation of claims made by both supporters and opponents of marijuana legalization. By Angela Dills, Sietse Goffard, and Jeffrey Miron.