SEO Optimization of an Online Cannabis Store: Step-by-Step Instructions

Contributor: MjSeo Agency
Let’s remember: the main page is the “face” of the site, and it should be in order since it is the beginning of the user’s acquaintance with the company. Most often, visitors come here from search engines. Here is the largest percentage of external links, and it distributes the link mass in favor of other pages of the resource.
In SEO optimization of the main page (and other pages), technical factors, semantics, linking, and much more are crucial. But its special role within the cannabis online store makes its adjustments to the optimization process.
What will we talk about:

Semantics: optimization and updating;
Content;
Meta tags: Title, H1, Description;
Link weight;
What is bad for homepage optimization?

Semantics: optimization and updating
We recommend starting with collecting the semantic core, namely, the competent distribution of keywords.
In the process of selecting queries, we focus not only on frequency but also analyze the general situation in the search results.
Here we recommend that you pay attention to what queries your competitors are promoting. This will help you build the right strategy or correct an existing one.
You can collect and check keywords using Serpstat or other programs that show how many main pages are promoted for a specified request.
We act according to the following scheme:

We determine the most common queries describing the activities of the site and collect all possible synonyms;
We collect the frequency of requests to determine if they can bring us traffic, or it is a “dummy”;
Check if the different spellings belong to the same group.

Thus, on the homepage, all keywords must be compatible with each other.
For example, we use a tool for uploading the TOP-10. Usually, with its help, we determine whether it is possible to promote requests on one page and then quickly analyze which pages are in the search results (main, categories, or products).
We recommend checking the semantic core every 2-3 months. Is it still valid, or do you need to add/remove/replace keywords?
You can’t do it once and expect that it will work — it’s not the case. The SERP changes quite often, as do the interests of users. If you want to be in the TOP for relevant queries, systematically update the semantic core.
Content
Do you even need text on the homepage? What should the content be like?
Before deciding whether to add text or not, we recommend that you analyze the sites of leading competitors in queries from search results in your topic.
What to pay attention to:

how much text they have on the main page;
what keywords do they use for optimization: high-frequency/low-frequency, direct/indirect;
are there key phrases in the headlines?
is there any internal linking in the text; if so, where do the links lead to?

After analyzing the competitors, you can start preparing the text, namely, setting the technical specification for the copywriter.
Here, we are guided by the following:

The H1 heading should reflect the company’s activities and contain an entry for the high-frequency keyword. Whenever possible, they should be catchy;
After reading the text, the user should learn something new and useful for oneself. We do not recommend making a pitch for yourself on the main page;
Key queries must be relevant;
The text must have a structure. A solid canvas of text is just bad manners. An article broken down into paragraphs and blocks, bulleted or numbered lists, tables, etc., looks much better. Probably, the search robot will not notice the difference (although we do not state this), but a visitor will definitely appreciate such a text design. And it is a living person who will buy your product, not a robot.

Instead of specifying a direct keyword, we break it down into individual words that must be mentioned in the text.
What else to look for when optimizing homepage content:
1.   Hidden text
At some point, this black SEO trick was best-known among SEO professionals. With the help of a white font, the text with the keywords was hidden under the scroll or off the screen. The user did not see it, but the search robots read the text and highly assessed it. Now you can be banned for this.
By the way, if you bought the site and you are not sure that there is no hidden text, press Ctrl + A. All text, including hidden one, will be highlighted.
2.   Page loading speed
In terms of SEO, this parameter is also of great importance — you select the right keywords, optimize the site, etc., the user visits the page, and… leaves without waiting for the site to load. It’s a shame, isn’t it? To prevent this from happening, measure the website loading speed. This can be done, for example, using Google PageSpeed ​​Insights.
In 2018, Google published a study that states that when the download speed increases from 1 to 3 seconds, the probability of rejection increases by 32%. If the loading time increases to 5 seconds, then the possibility of leaving the page will increase by 90%.
If the loading speed of your site leaves much to be desired, we recommend working out the content: compress the photo, upload the video to external resources (Vimeo, for example), and place the link on the main page, etc.
Readme: keep an eye on the quality of your photos and videos. If, for example, images are highly compressed, the quality will be lost, and this may affect traffic.
Speaking of the photo, don’t forget to fill in the alt attributes and short description, including relevant key entries. Also, check that image indexing is not blocked by robots.txt. This will help your resource to take part, among other things, in image search and, in general, to attract additional traffic (crucial for unique content).
Meta tags
These guys help to get additional information about specific pages of the site not only to search engines but also to ordinary users. Well-designed Title, H1, and Description directly affect the CTR (the ratio of the display of a site snippet in organic SERP to clicks on it).
Let’s take a look at each of the meta tags.
Title
It is essential to write down the name of the online store, its specialization, and, in some cases, the region (if it is crucial to pay attention to this).
The capacious description that you write here will be displayed in the search results. Remember this when filling out!
The optimal length is 60-70 characters with spaces.
What we recommend:

Place a high-frequency unique request here that is relevant to the page. Do not duplicate the keyword from the Title in tags of other pages.
Write keywords as readable as possible. Similar structure as {cannabis, buy, 24/7, city} is an undesirable format. It is better to write keywords in this way — {Buy cannabis in [city] — prices in the online store [Store name]}.

H1
This tag tells crawlers about the topic of the page and what it says to the visitors. That is why H1 must display the content of the main page as much as possible so that the page is relevant to the search results for the desired queries.
Basic recommendations for filling H1:

there should be a high-frequency relevant query here;
the structure of the text should be logical and readable;
put only one keyword and avoid commercial entries;
use clean tags without classes, etc. — that is, header tags in the source code.

Description
The importance of this tag cannot be overemphasized. And here’s why: a correctly filled description is displayed by search engines in a snippet and, as a result, users pay more attention to your site.
But this only works if the description is filled in correctly. Otherwise, Google will display the content from the page that is relevant in its opinion.
Recommendations for composing a description:

The description should not be identical to Title;
no overspam;
optimal size — up to 160 characters with spaces;
you need to take into account the tails from requests from the core. If you do not have the opportunity to specify some words from the core (inexpensive, sizes, prices, etc.) in the Title, it is better to enter them in the Description.

Again, we recommend analyzing competitors, carefully looking at what designs they use. This can be done manually or using an SEO analyzer, for example, SEMrush, AHrefs, etc.
Link weight
The main page, by tradition, collects the largest percentage of internal links and distributes its weight to the rest of the site. At the same time, it has the greatest link weight on the site since every page of the site links to her. That is why it is crucial to choose correctly which links will lead from the main page.
Recommendations:
●     Make sure that links to important pages and sections are accessible to search engines
To do this, you can go into the code and check that the links of the main navigation elements are direct links. Also, they must be relative, not absolute — i.e., we write the link without the domain name. For example: <a href=”/catalog/CBD/”> Oils&Capsules </a>;
●     Get rid of dangling nodes
These are pages in the main structure to which the link leads, but there is no outgoing link from it. A button for a feedback form, PDF files, etc., can become such a node. In fact, they pull over the incoming link weight and do not bring any benefit.
Getting rid of the dangling node is easy — close the links with a script. This will help to transfer more statistical weight to the priority pages.
●     Check the weight of the main page
Again, it is the main page that accumulates the largest number of incoming links, which are further distributed to other pages of the site. If the main one does not have the greatest weight, then a mistake was made somewhere. You can check the main page weight using PageWeight or Netpeak Spider.
By the way, about the number of links. In some materials devoted to SEO optimization of the main page, you can find recommendations for limiting the number of internal links — no more than 100.
In the meantime, there is no specific limit on the number of links in the Google Webmaster Guidelines, just “limit the number of links on a page to a reasonable number (maximum a few thousand).”
In any case, before proceeding with optimization, we recommend analyzing the TOP-10 and seeing how many links the leaders of the niche have.
The same Google constantly says that sites should be for people, with the most useful, high-quality content.
What can harm your homepage SEO optimization?
Of course, we cannot but tell you about the most common mistakes that can destroy all your efforts. In general, they relate to the entire site, but for the main page (in comparison with other pages), they are the most critical.
1.   Too much content
In the recommendations, Google writes that “The site should be for people.” So, people don’t read canvases of text. Also, they do not like the awkward interface and crooked keywords, which are clearly out of the question.
By breaking the delicate balance of content and neglecting usability, you run the risk of increasing bounce rates. And this, in turn, entails a decrease in traffic and “negative growth” of the site’s position in search engines.
2.   Third-party advertising
Here the principle is the same as in the previous paragraph. A large amount of advertising can scare off even the most loyal fan of your online store. If you are not ready to completely abandon third-party advertising, control its amount.
3.   Musical accompaniment
It is definitely a bad idea for an online store. Imagine you are sitting, calmly scrolling through sites and looking for a suitable product, and suddenly, music bursts into your cozy world. It feels pretty strange, don’t you agree? Music will probably be appropriate on image sites, where brand presentation is most important. But when it comes to an online store, we recommend abandoning this idea.
4.   Lack of page testing
This includes not only the loading and operation of the page on different devices but also the display of content.
For example, you have placed a photo of a product in the slider on the main page. Above — the name of the special offer. When checked on a standard monitor, everything was okay. But a user who looks at the site on their 4K monitor sees half of the product in the slider, and the text has merged with the photo.
And such errors can be on the entire page: somewhere the text has moved, there is a wrong button, the layout has gone, etc. This, in turn, entails an increase in refusals, and then … Well, you know.
In conclusion
Wow! In this article, we tried to collect the basic information that is important to consider in the SEO optimization of the home page.
At the same time, we remind you: each resource is unique.
Analyze competitors — leaders from search results for relevant queries for your site, take into account the features of your site, apply basic knowledge to the site, and may the growth of traffic and conversions be with you.
The post SEO Optimization of an Online Cannabis Store: Step-by-Step Instructions appeared first on CANORML.

Free States from Obsolete Federal Marijuana Laws

By Dale Gieringer and Geoffrey Lawrence
Federal laws against marijuana are outdated and counterproductive.  Polls show that nearly seven in ten Americans favor legalizing adult use of marijuana, and 90% favor medical use.   Eighteen states have now legalized adult use of marijuana, and 36 have laws allowing medical use.
Nonetheless, federal law remains stuck in the past, strictly prohibiting  marijuana as an illicit “Schedule 1”  substance like heroin, treating it more stringently than cocaine or methamphetamines.  As a result, it remains federally illegal for Americans to possess, grow, distribute, or transport marijuana, even for medical use and even where state law allows it.  The conflict between state and federal laws has rightly led Supreme Court Justice Thomas to question the legitimacy of continued federal prohibition.
How then to reform marijuana laws?   There is no one simple answer. A multitude of federal agencies and regulations are involved, and scores of different bills have been proposed to Congress. Recently, two comprehensive federal legalization bills have been introduced – the MORE Act in the House, and a new draft Senate bill by Sen. Schumer. Both get to the heart of the problem by removing marijuana from the list of controlled substances.
Descheduling is the keystone to marijuana reform because it lets marijuana be treated like other legal substances such as alcohol, tobacco and caffeine. While it removes federal penalties for marijuana use, it still allows states to regulate, prohibit, or legalize it as they please, like alcohol.
A weaker alternative, known as rescheduling, would regulate marijuana as a prescription-controlled substance like opiates.  While this scheme is said to be favored by the Biden administration, it fails to accommodate existing state laws for both medical and adult-use marijuana.
Descheduling has the advantage of assuring that state-legal marijuana is equally legal under federal law. It also clears outdated federal restrictions on banking, medical access, research, immigration, housing, employment and gun rights.
Federal oversight of interstate commerce, including internet sales and promotion, foreign imports, and exports into states that prohibit marijuana would facilitate an orderly market.
But federal authorities needn’t comprehensively regulate and tax the entire marijuana industry, as presently envisioned in the Schumer bill.  The latter would impose new federal rules on product testing, labeling, packaging, record keeping, cultivation, manufacture, inventory tracking, and FDA regulation of cannabis products.  States already do all this and such regulation falls within their constitutionally reserved powers.
The federal role in cannabis regulation should rightly be restricted to products in interstate or foreign commerce.  This might best be done through an agency like the Alcohol and Tobacco Trade Bureau, which has experience dealing with a diversity of state laws for similar adult-use products.  In contrast, FDA regulation is notoriously costly and time-consuming, and the agency has a poor record of responding to consumer demand.  The FDA is especially out-of-touch with medical marijuana, having repeatedly ruled that it lacks scientific proof of safety and efficacy, despite hundreds of studies to the contrary, and has stone-walled the legal hemp industry.
Some state tax regimes already make the black market more attractive to consumers and producers, and layering high federal taxes on top will exacerbate that trend. In California, where the total tax burden approaches 40%, more than half of  the market is supplied by unlicensed dealers.  A good case can be made that the total tax burden on cannabis should not exceed 15%,  the amount currently placed on alcoholic spirits.  Any federal excise tax should finance only the cost of facilitating inventory transfers between state regulatory frameworks, which should continue to govern product standards.
Finally, it’s essential that federal reform address the damage done by marijuana prohibition.  Both House and Senate bills have restorative justice provisions to expunge or resentence persons for offenses that have been decriminalized.  They also include equity provisions to ensure that prior offenders are not excluded from the legal market, and to promote competition and reduce barriers to entry for small entrepreneurs.
In the end, while there are many paths to cannabis reform, the wisest course is to free states from obsolescent federal laws, not further burden them with new federal taxes and regulations.
Dale Gieringer, Ph.D. is director of the California chapter of the National Organization for the Reform of Marijuana Laws (NORML). Geoffrey Lawrence is director of drug policy at Reason Foundation and a founding member of the libertarian Cannabis Freedom Alliance.
An abbreviated version of this article ran in the LA Daily News.
The post Free States from Obsolete Federal Marijuana Laws appeared first on CANORML.

VOTE NO ON THE NEWSOM RECALL

Newsom at the National Cannabis Industry Associations’s 2016 Cannabis Business Summit in Oakland, CA
It’s unlikely that any possible replacement candidate will be as favorably attentive to cannabis policy as Governor Newsom.  For that reason, California NORML recommends voting NO on the gubernatorial recall and encourages cannabis supporters to make sure you are registered to vote, and do vote against the recall in the election.
The sponsors of this year’s recall election are no friends of marijuana or criminal justice reform. Whatever else might be said about Gavin Newsom, no governor has been so supportive of legal marijuana.
When other politicians were ducking the issue, then-Lieutenant Governor Newsom became the highest-ranking state official to endorse legal adult use and established a task force to help guide the way. Since becoming governor, Newsom has appointed capable, helpful officials who have been accessible to cannabis advocates. The Newsom administration has advanced measures to expand on-site consumption and licensed cannabis events; promote equity applicants; afford business tax deductions; allow billboard advertising; and improve and streamline the state’s burdensome regulatory system.
To be sure, Newsom hasn’t been perfect. He has been criticized for not pushing hard enough to reduce burdensome taxes and regulations, and for being a stickler for anti-smoking rules that wrongly treat cannabis like tobacco. But his hands have also been tied by the legislature, federal laws, and California’s overly restrictive Prop. 64 initiative.
Above all, Newsom deserves credit for declaring cannabis to be an essential service during the COVID crisis, a move mocked by critics and recall proponents. He also approved emergency rules to allow drive-through and curbside pick-ups of cannabis, to extend the expiration date for medical IDs and recommendations, and to allow for donations of cannabis to needy patients by cannabis businesses.
 
QUESTION 2
In addition to voting on the recall, voters may choose a candidate to replace Newsom if he loses. If the recall succeeds, any of the 46 opposing candidates that gets a plurality, even as small as 20% by some predictions, could take the Governorship, although whoever wins will have to face re-election next year. For voters concerned about marijuana and drug policy, here is a rundown of replacement candidates’ views.
 
DEMOCRATS
While no Democratic office holders are running in the recall, one Democratic candidate, Jacqueline McGowan, boasts experience as a cannabis advocate. An avowed medical cannabis patient, McGowan has actively lobbied local governments for common-sense regulations and permitting since 2014. McGowan is highly critical of Prop. 64 for over-regulating and taxing the industry and generally supports more access for all adults, especially patients. She is the only candidate whose major campaign issue is cannabis
Moderate Democrat Kevin Paffrath, a real estate investor and financial advisor with a large YouTube following, has emerged as a possible contender in the polls. Paffrath is one of the few candidates to mention cannabis on his website, criticizing the state’s inept efforts to stem the illegal market: “80% of cannabis sold in California is illegal… [Illegal farms] pollute our ground water & steal water from fire hydrants. California’s solution? REMOVE 100 fire hydrants in an area relying on them for fire prevention. The Governor has not led the effort to ‘decriminalized’ marijuana, he’s encouraged illegal farming and poor leadership in getting legal business licenses.”
 
REPUBLICANS
San Diego ex-Mayor Kevin Faulconer stayed at arm’s length while the city council moved early on to approve licensed cannabis businesses. Local advocates describe his position as one of “benign neglect,” neither obstructing nor embracing cannabis. However, they also complain that he was unresponsive to their inquiries and made snide comments about pot.
Talk-show host Larry Elder is a conservative Republican with libertarian leanings. In a 2012 show, Elder called it a “mind blower” that marijuana was still illegal in a country with gay marriage and legal abortion. He criticized the federal government for wrongly classifying marijuana as an addictive drug with no medical use; blasted the LA City Council for voting to ban pot dispensaries; and took Santa Monica to task for making it illegal for consenting adults to smoke cigarettes in their own apartment. Elder denounced the war on drugs for aggravating criminality, calling drug use a health, not criminal justice problem. Like Trump, whom he supports, Elder refused to fully disclose his tax returns, but was allowed on the ballot anyhow.
Hip-hop musician Nickolas Wildstar describes himself as a “Black Sheep Libertarian.” He is also a medical cannabis patient who used to enjoy good medicine under Prop.. 215. He complains he can no longer do so in the for-profit, regulated regime established by Prop 64. He claims Prop. 64 is illegal and proposes introducing to remedy the situation. He would cease all future licensing of commercial “for profit” cannabis licenses.
Businessman John Cox, who has been parading around California with a faux grizzly bear, is out of touch with a state where grizzlies are extinct. In his losing campaign against Newsom in 2018, Cox put his foot in his mouth by suggesting that marijuana users be hospitalized to cure them of substance abuse. He then backtracked by saying he’s “certainly for medical marijuana” and “not necessarily demanding” hospitalization for cannabis users. A devout Catholic, Cox is known for conservative views on social issues.
Olympic athlete Caitlyn Jenner has had little to say in her vague campaign. When still known as Bruce, Jenner was outraged on camera in 2014 when his then-wife Kris shared an edible with her mother on Keeping Up With the Kardashians. “I won’t have it in this house,” s/he said.
Board of Equalization Member Ted Gaines, who is campaigning against burdensome taxes and regulations, posted a long, miserable voting record against marijuana and drug reform in his dozen years in the state legislature (2007-2019). Now he is running against Prop 47, which de-incarcerated nonviolent drug offenders.
Asm. Kevin Kiley from Granite Bay has posted a poor, conservative voting record in the legislature, opposing expansion of cannabis events, veterinary use and medical access for schoolchildren.
Former Rep. Doug Ose, a law-and-order advocate, was a strident drug warrior in Congress (1999-2005), where he voted to support the federal attack on California’s medical marijuana law. He now concedes that the voters have spoken on marijuana, but complains about the state’s “lack of clarity” on regulations and continual failure to curb illegal operations.
 
LIBERTARIANS
Riverside County Supervisor Jeff Hewitt is the official Libertarian party candidate. He styles himself as an “Old School Californian”. As a Supervisor, he voted to roll back zoning restrictions for cannabis operations, advocating free-market competition.
 
GREENS
Dan Kapelovitz, a former journalist for Hustler magazine is a practicing defense attorney. He founded the Radical Law Center, focusing on defense of DUI, drug crimes, sex crimes, animal law, constitutional rights and more. His responses to Cal NORML’s candidate questionnaire reveal him to be solidly in favor of full marijuana legalization and human rights for cannabis users. He is also for lessening of burdensome regulations on cannabis, and strongly for changing federal law.
L.A. hair stylist Heather Collins, “absolutely” supports legal cannabis and would fight to have it legalized federally. She supports lower taxes and regulations in line with other comparable businesses, local control of licensed sales, and shutting down illegal shops.
The post VOTE NO ON THE NEWSOM RECALL appeared first on CANORML.

Oakland City Council Approves Resolution to Support AB 1256

July 26, 2021 – Today, Oakland City Council unanimously approved a resolution in support of Assembly Bill 1256 by Assemblymember Bill Quirk, to prohibit employers from discriminating against potential or current employees who have tested positive for inactive cannabis metabolites in their urine or hair.
The resolution was authored by Vice Mayor Rebecca Kaplan and co-authored by Councilmember Carroll Fife. Vice Mayor Kaplan stated in her support memo:
“Oakland residents and applicants in the City of Oakland should not be punished for usage of legalized cannabis. Employers should only be authorized to dismiss or discipline workers from usage of legalized cannabis when hired, once the applicant is an employee subjugated to workplace politics and conditions of employment. Preventing applicants from being hired for usage of legalized medications and legalized recreational substances places barriers of entry that is discriminatory and negatively impacts applicants from underserved and disadvantaged neighborhoods in the City of Oakland and its surrounding cities.”
Last Tuesday, the San Francisco Board of Supervisors unanimously passed a resolution by Supervisors Shamann Walton and Matt Haney condemning the suspension from the Olympics of Sha’Carri Richardson over her marijuana drug test, and calling on the World and US Anti-Doping Agencies to change their marijuana policies. Supervisor Haney also introduced a resolution in favor of AB 1256 to end similar employment discrimination for Californians; it is expected to be voted on at tomorrow’s SF BOS meeting.
When California voters passed Proposition 64 in 2016 to legalize the adult use of cannabis, there were no protections put in place to prevent employment discrimination against cannabis consumers. Assembly Bill 1256 addresses these inequities while still allowing employers to ensure a workforce that is unimpaired on the job.
Urine and hair tests for cannabis don’t detect current impairment, but rather inactive drug residues that stay in the system days and weeks after use. “These tests have nothing to do with workplace safety or job performance,” stated Dale Gieringer, Director of Cal NORML. “There are much better ways to protect workers in safety-sensitive jobs.”
The cities of Atlanta, New York City, Philadelphia, Washington DC, Rochester NY, and Richmond VA have enacted laws protecting employment rights of recreational marijuana users, as have the states of Montana, Nevada, New York, New Jersey and Connecticut. Laws in twenty states: Arizona, Arkansas, Connecticut, Delaware, Illinois, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Minnesota, Montana, Nevada, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, Oklahoma, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, South Dakota, Vermont, Virginia and West Virginia prohibit employers from discriminating against workers on the basis of their use of medical marijuana.
AB 1256 (Quirk) is a Cal NORML-sponsored bill; it has been introduced in the legislature as a two-year bill and will be heard in 2022.
The post Oakland City Council Approves Resolution to Support AB 1256 appeared first on CANORML.

Sha’Carrie Richardson Ban Highlights Injustices in Drug Testing

July 6, 2021 – In a story with “legs” in more ways than one, public outcry has been intense over the banning of sprinter Sha’Carrie Richardson from competing in the Olympics in the 100-meter race she won during the trials in Oregon last month. The US Anti-Doping Agency announced last week that Richardson had tested positive for marijuana and would be suspended from competing for 30 days. She will miss the 100-meter race at the upcoming Olympics, but might be able to run in the 4X100 meter relay if she is named to the US Team.
White House Press Secretary Jen Psaki, who made excuses for the Biden administration firing employees over past marijuana use earlier this year, said when asked about Richardson on Friday, “this was an independent decision made by the U.S. Anti-Doping Agency and not a decision that would be made by the U.S. government,” adding, “that Richardson “is an inspiring young woman who has gone through a lot personally—and she also happens to be one of the fastest women in the world.”
On Saturday, President Biden was asked if he thought the ban was fair and said, “The rules are the rules….whether they should remain the rules is a different issue,” adding he “was really proud of [Richardson] and the way she responded” to the controversy. Biden didn’t take a follow-up question about Congresswoman Alexandra Ocasio-Cortez and other congressmembers writing to WADA and USADA asking them to reconsider their decision. Rep. Barbara Lee​ (D-Oakland) is also circulating a letter of protest.
It’s been noted that Richardson was in Oregon, where marijuana is legal, when she used it. However in Oregon, and many other “legal” states like California, workers can still lose their jobs, or job opportunities, for using marijuana off the job. The incident is emblematic of drug testing and employment rights for marijuana users in the US: despite 18 states plus Washington, D.C. legalizing recreational marijuana, we’re disqualifying some of our best and brightest workers over an exercise in freedom of choice that has no effect on job performance. Urine and hair tests, in particular, detect only inactive metabolites from marijuana used days or weeks before a test, and have no correlation with on-the-job performance, whether you’re working at a manufacturing job or running track.
The news about Richardson comes just after Connecticut became the fifth state to protect the employment rights of recreational marijuana users while legalizing marijuana, pointing out in its law that a positive test for inactive marijuana metabolites “shall not be construed, without other evidence, as proof that such individual is under the influence of cannabis.” Twenty-one states protect medical marijuana users’ employment rights, and last month the California State Personnel Board ruled that an employee can’t be fired for using marijuana off the job, and a urine test doesn’t prove on-the-job impairment.
The NFL is no longer suspending players who test positive for marijuana, and is funding research into its use for pain management. The NBA has ceased random testing for marijuana, and cannabinoids were taken off the MLB’s drugs of abuse list in 2019. The World Anti-Doping Agency (WADA), which governs the Olympics, relaxed its rules on CBD in 2019, but THC remains prohibited.
NORML has issued an action alert by which supporters can write to WADA and USADA asking them to revise their policies to be in compliance with the shifting legal and cultural standing of cannabis. It’s something that should happen for all workers, everywhere.
LEARN MORE ABOUT CAL NORML’S EMPLOYMENT RIGHTS CAMPAIGN
The post Sha’Carrie Richardson Ban Highlights Injustices in Drug Testing appeared first on CANORML.

Luke Scarmazzo, California’s Last Federal Medical Marijuana Prisoner

On September 27, 2006, the DEA raided California Healthcare Collective, a medical marijuana dispensary in Modesto that had been operating and paying taxes for more than a year. A 2007 Fresno Bee story revealed that the focus of the federally funded, Fresno-based Central Valley High Intensity Drug Trafficking Area and its chief Bill Ruzzamenti had shifted from methamphetamine to marijuana.
In a ceremony on January 18 of that year, then White House drug czar John Walters honored the state, local and federal officers who took down the California Healthcare Collective. Ruzzamenti nominated the Modesto police officers and others who received the “National Marijuana Initiative” awards. The Central Valley HIDTA’s goal had been “to reduce the manufacture, trafficking and distribution of methamphetamine, precursor chemicals and other dangerous drugs.” Over time, the Valley’s big meth labs decamped for Mexico—so agents have sought new targets.
CHC proprietors Ricardo Montes and Luke Scarmazzo, both 26, were found guilty of operating a “continuing criminal enterprise” in May 2008. On learning that the offense carried a mandatory 20-year minimum sentence, two jurors filed declarations with U.S. District Court in Fresno recanting their verdict, and lawyers sought a retrial.
Scarmazzo sentenced to 21 years and 10 months and Montes to 20 years. On January 5, 2011, a federal appeals court upheld the convictions of Scarmazzo and Montes, denying them a new trial. “We followed California law to the letter,” Scarmazzo stated. “We paid our taxes. We went to work every day providing a benefit and service to the community. Yet in the end, we were made out to look like common criminals.”
Ricardo Montes was granted clemency by President Obama and was released in May 2017. Unfortunately, and inexplicably, his co-defendant Scarmazzo’s petition was denied. In January 2021, Luke was denied release at the last minute by President Trump.
Luke posted on his Facebook page (1/27/21) that, “I have been in this quarantine unit in a federal penitentiary at Yazoo City, Mississippi for 91 days. When I arrived here prison officials lied and told me I’d only be here the standard 14 days. This, despite me being ‘COVID recovered’ in September 2020, with at least a temporary acquired natural immunity. I’m locked into my cell 24 hours a day, 7 days a week. Out of 168 hour week, I’m allowed out of my cell for 3 hours to take a shower and use the phone; the other 165 I’m in a concrete box. I haven’t felt the warm sun or inhaled a breath of fresh air in over 3 months. I’m fed enough to be kept alive and confined in frigid temperatures. And these are just a few of the blatant constitutional and human rights violations that I endure daily without just cause.”
Luke has served 14 years and isn’t scheduled for release until 2027. He is the last known federal medical marijuana prisoner from California. He currently has two appeals pending in court that could set #FreeLukeScarmazzo. Read more about Luke.
Luke Scarmazzo 63131-097
USP Yazoo City
PO BOX 5000
Yazoo City, MS 39194
Release date: 03/14/2027
The post Luke Scarmazzo, California’s Last Federal Medical Marijuana Prisoner appeared first on CANORML.

Ruling Protects CA State Employees Against Discrimination For Off-The-Job Marijuana Use

CALIFORNIA PERSONNEL BOARD RULES THAT FAILING A URINE TEST FOR MARIJUANA IS NOT PROOF OF EMPLOYEE’S IMPAIRMENT OR GROUNDS FOR DISMISSAL
June 17, 2021 – The California State Personnel Board (SPB), established in the state constitution, provides direction to departments about civil service laws, rules, and policy, and also investigates and adjudicates alleged violations of civil service law which are filed by employees, applicants, and members of the public.
Darrin Harper brought such an allegation against the California Department of Transportation, which refused to reinstate him on his job after he failed a urine test for marijuana use. The SPB ruled that a urine test does not establish that an employee is under the influence of marijuana when reporting for duty, and therefore “does not justify discipline.” The ruling reinstates Mr. Harper to his CA DOT job.
The ruling doesn’t protect employees who are “impaired or under the influence from marijuana, alcohol, or any other substance while at work or while on standby for work.” It concludes, “the Board notes that it does not take a position on whether using marijuana is a good thing or a bad thing. The voters have spoken and legalized it in the State of California. Given that reality, State Agencies are powerless to discipline employees, like Appellant, whose test showed only that marijuana had been ingested or used sometime in the past, but that Appellant was not under the influence of marijuana while on duty.”
The ruling should protect all state employees against employment discrimination due to unwarranted drug testing, at least for inactive THC metabolites (as urine and hair testing do). Unfortunately it won’t protect government workers at the city or county levels, nor employees at private companies.
A Cal NORML-sponsored bill to protect employees in California against drug tests for marijuana that do not prove impairment, AB 1256, has been introduced in the legislature as a two-year bill, to be heard in committee later this year or in 2022. Read more about Cal NORML’s employment rights campaign
Also see: Caltrans fired a dad over a marijuana pee test. Here’s why that won’t happen again
Excerpts from CA State Personnel Board decision at: https://www.spb.ca.gov/content/precedential/Harper031721.pdf
In this case, Appellant, a CalTrans Highway Maintenance Worker, submitted to a drug test upon his return to duty after an extended leave of absence. The urinalysis test revealed the presence of delta 9 tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) [sic – it was an inactive metabolite] in his system, which establishes that Appellant had, at some prior point in time, inhaled or ingested marijuana or a marijuana-infused substance. There were no allegations in the Notice of Adverse Action (NOAA), nor proof at the evidentiary hearing, that Appellant was under the influence of marijuana when he reported for duty or on standby for duty or that he possessed or used marijuana while on duty or on standby. Under these circumstances, a positive urinalysis test for marijuana, without more, does not justify discipline under any of the charges in the NOAA.
Respondent, however, contends that, by virtue of designating Highway Maintenance Workers under California Code of Regulation, title 2, section 599.9613  testing positive for marijuana as a safety sensitive employee is a basis for discipline.
This decision does not impact peace officers who are expressly prohibited from using any mind-altering substance regardless of its legality. To protect the public and ensure the safety and security of its correctional institutions, the state must ensure that its peace officers do not use illegal drugs, or misuse prescription drugs, unauthorized or other illegal mind-altering substances under any circumstances, (Cal. Code of Reg., tit. 2, § 599.960, subd. (e).)
Nothing in this decision should be interpreted to excuse or shield an employee from discipline if they are impaired or under the influence from marijuana, alcohol, or any other substance while at work or while on standby for work. Such conduct remains prohibited under section 599.960, subdivision (b), and may also violate the employing department’s workplace policy.
The post Ruling Protects CA State Employees Against Discrimination For Off-The-Job Marijuana Use appeared first on CANORML.

Cal NORML Calls for Drug Peace Day on June 17

This June 17th marks the 50th anniversary of President Nixon’s declaration of the War on Drugs.  The evidence is clear that the drug war has failed; 83% of Americans say so in a recent ACLU poll.
Cal NORML is declaring a day of “drug peace” in support of more effective, equitable, and humane policies and is circulating following declaration to lawmakers asking for their support:

The War on Drugs is a war on people. Since 1971, California has recorded over 10 million felony drug arrests, including 1 million felony marijuana arrests.
The War on Drugs has disproportionately criminalized the disadvantaged the poor, and racial and ethnic minorities. Blacks were four times more likely than whites to be arrested for a marijuana crime in California in 2019, when Latinx people were twice as likely to be arrested for marijuana as whites.
The War on Drugs is a crime-creation program. The drug laws provide economic opportunity for underground dealers, smugglers, cartels,  and narcotics police, while criminalizing millions of users.
While California has rightly moved to legalize cannabis, excessive regulations and taxes at state and local levels handicap the licensed industry and continue to feed the illicit market.   The barriers are especially burdensome to less wealthy equity applicants.
The War on Drugs has not solved our drug abuse problem.  Tragically, it has failed to stem an epidemic of opiate abuse fed by prescription drugs, heroin and fentanyl.
Meanwhile, U.S. law still bans the medical use of cannabis, despite overwhelming evidence that it can effectively reduce opiate abuse in the treatment of chronic pain.
U.S. law likewise bars research using state-legal cannabis.
Californians have repeatedly  shown they are fed up with crime-creating drug laws by voting for Prop. 215, Prop. 36, Prop. 47, and Prop 64.

We therefore call for designating June 17, 2021 as a day of Drug Peace, and join 65% of Americans in calling for an end to the US’s unjust and racist War on Drugs.
The post Cal NORML Calls for Drug Peace Day on June 17 appeared first on CANORML.

Sponsor Cal NORML’s 25th Anniversary of Prop. 215 Celebration

Raise your company’s profile by sponsoring Cal NORML’s 25th anniversary celebration of Prop. 215, the historic voter initiative that legalized medical marijuana in California and jump-started marijuana reform across the country.
The day-long event will be held at the beautiful General’s Residence at Ft. Mason Center in San Francisco. Speakers from around the state will reminisce about the coalition of activists and events that made history 25 years ago, and make plans to move forward towards further reforms.
Sponsorship will position and brand your business as one that is helping to move cannabis issues forward. We expect at least 100 attendees.
SPONSORSHIP LEVELS
• $5,000 Platinum
• $2,500 Gold
• $1000 Silver
• $500 Bronze
WHAT YOU GET 
$500 Bronze
• One free ticket to the event
• Listing with link on the Event Website Page
• Space on the literature table for your product or service
• Acknowledgement in the slide show at the event
$1000 Silver
• All of the above, plus:
• Announcement of sponsorship on Cal NORML’s social media accounts
• One Cal NORML eblast sponsorship (value: $200)
• A shared table at the event to hand out literature and (cannabis-free) samples
$2,500 Gold
• All of the above, plus:
• One-year business listing on CaNORML.org (value: $500)
• Two free tickets to the event
• A 6′ table at the event to hand out literature and (cannabis-free) samples
$5,000 Platinum
• All of the above, plus:
• Ability to add your company’s name or logo to name tag lavaliers or goody bags, etc.
• One-year listing, plus a banner ad on CaNORML.org
Questions? Write ellen@canorml.org
The post Sponsor Cal NORML’s 25th Anniversary of Prop. 215 Celebration appeared first on CANORML.

25th215

SAVE THE DATE!
Cal NORML’s 25th Anniversary
of Prop. 215 Celebration
Join us to celebrate California’s
historic 1996 medical marijuana law
on the date it passed 25 years ago.
Friday, November 5
The General’s Residence
Ft. Mason, San Francisco
Stay Tuned for More Details!

Join Cal NORML’s email alert list to be updated on all news, action items, and events.
The post 25th215 appeared first on CANORML.