About Richard Keyt

This author has not yet filled in any details.
So far Richard Keyt has created 75 blog entries.

Arizona Proposition 203 – Legalization of Medical Marijuana

On November 2, 2010, Arizona voters will vote yes or no on Proposition 203, the medical marijuana law.  If approved, Prop 203 will legalize the prescription, sale and cultivation of marijuana  in Arizona for  approved medicinal purposes.  Doctors will be able to issue prescriptions for an “allowable amount” of marijuana to a “qualifying person” who suffers from a “debilitating medical condition.”  The term “debilitating medical condition” means one or more of the following:

  • cancer, glaucoma, positive status for human immunodeficiency virus, acquired immune deficiency syndrome, hepatitis c, amyotrophic lateral sclerosis, crohn’s disease, agitation of alzheimer’s disease or the treatment of these conditions.
  • a chronic or debilitating disease or medical condition or its treatment that produces one or more of the following: cachexia or wasting syndrome; severe and chronic pain; severe nausea; seizures, including those characteristic of epilepsy; or severe and persistent muscle spasms, including those characteristic of multiple sclerosis.
  • any other medical condition or its treatment added by the Arizona Department of Health Services (“DHS”).

A qualifying person is a person who has been diagnosed with a debilitating medical condition.   The allowable amount of marijuana that a qualifying person may acquire and use is:

  • 2.5 ounces of “usable marijuana,” which is defined as “the dried flowers of the marijuana plant, and any mixture or preparation thereof, but does not include the seeds, stalks and roots of the plant and does not include the weight of any non-marijuana ingredients combined with marijuana and prepared for consumption as food or drink; and
  • if the qualifying patient’s registry identification card states that the qualifying patient is authorized to cultivate marijuana, twelve marijuana plants contained in an enclosed, locked facility except that the plants are not required to be in an enclosed, locked facility if the plants are being transported because the qualifying patient is moving.  An “enclosed, locked facility” is defined as a closet, room, greenhouse or other enclosed area equipped with locks or other security devices that permit access only by a cardholder.

For patients who are not able to acquire or administer allowable amounts of marijuana, they may use the services of a “designated caregiver” which is defined as a person who:

  • is at least twenty-one years of age.
  • has agreed to assist with a patient’s medical use of marijuana.
  • has not been convicted of an excluded felony offense.
  • assists no more than five qualifying patients with the medical use of marijuana.
  • may receive reimbursement for actual costs incurred in assisting a registered qualifying patient’s medical use of marijuana if the registered designated caregiver is connected to the registered qualifying patient through the department’s registration process.  The designated caregiver may not be paid any fee or compensation for his service as a caregiver.

The amount of allowable marijuana a designated caregiver may possess, cultivate or transport for each designated patient is the same as for the designated patient.

If approved, Proposition 203 provides that within 120 days of its effective date, the Arizona Department of Health Services must promulgate rules and regulations governing nonprofit medical marijuana dispensaries, for the purpose of protecting against diversion and theft without imposing an undue burden on nonprofit medical marijuana dispensaries or compromising the confidentiality of qualifying persons and caregivers.

Proposition 203 also would allow for the creation of Arizona medical marijuana dispensaries that must be Arizona nonprofit entities.  Qualifying parties and designated caregivers who do not cultivate grow their own personal weed, will be able to buy it from a DHS approved medical marijuana dispensary.

What is an Arizona Medical Marijuana Dispensary?

Unfortunately, Proposition 203 contains some unanswered questions for people contemplating creating an Arizona medical marijuana dispensary (“MMD”).  The proposition defines “nonprofit medical marijuana dispensary” as “a not-for-profit entity that acquires, possesses, cultivates, manufactures, delivers, transfers, transports, supplies, sells or dispenses marijuana or related supplies and educational materials to cardholders.”  As an Arizona attorney who has formed over 2,600 companies, including many nonprofit corporations, I don’t know what the proposition means when it uses the term “not-for-profit entity.

Arizona statutes provide for the creation of limited partnerships, limited liability limited partnerships, general partnerships, business trusts, limited liability companies, for profit corporations and nonprofit corporations.  The term “entity” is a general term that applies to all of the previously mentioned types of business organizations.  Any of these organizations could be operated on a not-for-profit basis, but  the  corporation is the only type of nonprofit entity expressly provided for under Arizona statutory law.

Proposition 203 contains this provision:

A registered nonprofit medical marijuana dispensary shall be operated on a not-for-profit basis.  The bylaws of a registered nonprofit medical marijuana dispensary shall contain such provisions relative to the disposition of revenues and receipts to establish and maintain its nonprofit character.  A registered nonprofit medical marijuana dispensary need not be recognized as tax-exempt by the Internal Revenue Service and is not required to incorporate pursuant to Title 10, Chapter 19, Article 1.

The good news for the future owners of Arizona MMDs is that the Arizona nonprofit medical marijuana dispensary need not be an IRS approved tax-exempt organization, but this provision further muddies the waters.  What does operated on a not-for-profit basis mean?  Must the entity operate at a loss or plan its affairs so that its annual income is exactly equal to its annual expenses?  What happens if the MMD has a loss in year one and a profit in year two?  Does DHS net the profits against the losses and revoke the MMD’s license if it has a profit?  What if it has losses two out of five years?  How are profits defined?  Can the people who form the entity, officers, directors and employees be paid sufficient compensation to zero out the profits each year?  If so,could a member of the board of directors who attends a few board meetings during a year be paid $150,000 and would that payment reduce the entity’s profits?

The provision quoted above refers to Bylaws that must contain such provisions relative to the disposition of revenues and receipts to establish and maintain its nonprofit character.”  Does this language imply that the MMD must be a corporation?  In general Bylaws is a governing document used by corporations.  Other types of entities can adopt “Bylaws,” but Bylaws are not one of the governing documents used or adopted by non-corporate entities.

As an Arizona lawyer who has drafted the organizational documents for many nonprofit corporations, I don’t have a clue what Prop 203 means when it says the Bylaws must “contain such provisions relative to the disposition of revenues and receipts to establish and maintain its nonprofit character.”  The nonprofits I create do not have any such provisions, nor are these types of provisions required under Arizona’s nonprofit corporation statutes.  Hopefully the DHS will tell MMD’s what this provision means so they can modify their organizational documents to contain the required provisions.

Nor does it help that Proposition 203 says MMDs are not required to incorporate pursuant to Title 10, Chapter 19, Article 1.  The statute cited concerns only Arizona nonprofit corporations formed as cooperative marketing associations.  Chapter 19 also applies to electric cooperative nonprofit membership corporations, fraternal and benevolent societies and nonprofit electric generation and transmission cooperative corporations.  The reference to Title 10, Chapter 19, Article 1 in the language of the proposition is baffling because most Arizona nonprofit corporations are formed under other chapters of Title 10 of the Arizona Revised Statutes.  Why did the drafters cite only this one little used type of Arizona nonprofit corporation?

The $64,000 Question about MMDs

Proposition 203 creates a big problem for people who are contemplating creating an MMD?  The $64,000 question is must an Arizona MMD be created as an Arizona nonprofit corporation or can it be one of the types of entities typically formed to make a profit, but operated as a nonprofit entity?  We will not know the answer to this question until DHS gives us the answer or it approves MMDs that are not Arizona nonprofit corporations.  The answer to this question is important because of a fundamental difference between Arizona nonprofit corporations and all of the other types of entities mentioned above.  This fundamental difference is:

  • Arizona nonprofit corporations do not have owners.  This means that if the nonprofit corporation becomes valuable, there are no owners who can easily (or perhaps lawfully) put that value in their pockets.
  • Arizona limited partnerships, limited liability limited partnerships, general partnerships, business trusts, limited liability companies and for profit corporations have owners who can sell the business and keep the money.

For more see “Prop. 203: Legalization of medical marijuana” and “Text of Prop 203 that Would Legalize the Prescription and Sale of Medical Marijuana in Arizona.”

How to Hire Arizona Business Attorney Richard Keyt to Form an Arizona Nonprofit Corporation

To learn about forming and operating Arizona nonprofit corporations, see the Arizona Corporation Law Library.  To hire Arizona medical marijuana attorney Richard Keyt (aka the Arizona medical marijuana lawyer) to form an Arizona nonprofit corporation, read my articles called “How to Form an Arizona Nonprofit Corporation” and “Arizona Nonprofit Corporation Formation Service” or just complete my online Nonprofit Corporation Incorporation Questionnaire.

Higher Education’s Bubble is about to Burst

I’ve been saying for some time that the higher education system in the United States is broken.  Rather than existing to educate young people and prepare them for jobs in the adult world, institutions of higher education have become money printing machines for the people and organizations that run them.  While the cost of an education goes up, the quality of the education goes down.  It’s a win win situation for schools on the gravy train, but it’s a lose lose situation for the victims students.  Consider reality:

  • A college degree is not an automatic ticket to a good paying job.
  • Big school debt equals big life-long problems when you owe $100,000, $150,000, $200,000 or more

    1.  It becomes harder to find somebody who will marry you.  A lot of people will not want to marry into that kind of debt.
    2.  It may not be possible to get a loan to buy a home.  School loan debts may replace home ownership as the big debt paid over thirty years.

  • The real estate market and the real estate industry will suffer because so many people will simply have too much debt to qualify for a home loan.
  • It is virtually impossible to discharge a school loan in a bankruptcy.

According to University of Tennessee law professor Glenn Reynolds who wrote the article in the Washington Times linked to below, the cost of a college education has gone up 439 percent since 1982.  Why?  The higher education bubble is about to burst.  Schools may set tuition at any amount and students will pay because they can borrow any amount necessary to finance higher education from an approved institution.  Consider these actual  tuition and total costs of school year numbers and ask why would anybody would spend the incredible amounts of money required to get a law degree in these difficult economic times.  Below are the annual tuition and total expenses for nine months of law school at the indicated schools.

  • California Western School of Law (a bottom tier U.S. News & World Report law school)- $40,680 tuition/year & $61,000/year total (estimated because the school doesn’t give prospective students a clue as to how much it will cost for room, board and incidentals in San Diego, California for nine months) = $183,000 for three years
  • Harvard Law School – $45,450 tuition/year & $70,100/year total = $210,300 for three years
  • University of California at Berkley– Boalt Hall:  nonresident $49,310 tuition/year & $71,274 total/year =$213,822 for three years
  • Yale Law School – $48,500 tuition/year & $76,650 / year total = $229,950 for three years

Washington Times:  “First — as with the housing bubble — cheap and readily available credit has let people borrow to finance education.  They’re willing to do so because of (1) consumer ignorance, as students (and, often, their parents) don’t fully grasp just how harsh the impact of student loan payments will be after graduation; and (2) a belief that, whatever the cost, a college education is a necessary ticket to future prosperity.  Bubbles burst when there are no longer enough excessively optimistic and ignorant folks to fuel them. And there are signs that this is beginning to happen already.”

For more on this topic see:

Growing Student Loan Debts Mortgaging Future of Young College Grads

Houston we have a problem, but it’s not in outer space.  The university system with its out of control tuition increases and lack of regard for the laws of economics is crippling young people with mountains of school loan debt that will take decades or in some cases, lifetimes to repay.  The system allows schools to increase tuition at will knowing that students have a blank check from the federal government student loan program to borrow as much as necessary to attend every school regardless of how much the room, board and tuition.

The schools do not warn the prospective students about the consequences of incurring huge student loan debts.  Nor do the schools give accurate employment statistics for their graduates in all their majors so that prospective students can know in advance what their chances are of getting a good paying job that will allow them to repay the debts.  Truth in advertising does not apply to schools when it comes to the cost of an education.  It’s only a matter of time before aggressive trial lawyers start filing class action lawsuits against schools for omitting to tell prospective students the material facts.  Only then will schools stop raising tuition through the roof and become competitive in terms of the cost of a college education.

The New York Times published an eye-opening story about big school loans called “Placing the Blame as Students Are Buried in Debt.”  The story discusses the sad situation of a 26 year old young woman who ran up a $100,000 debt while getting an undergraduate degree from New York University.  She attends night school to defer the payments, but that only causes the interest to accrue and the debt to spiral upwards.  The story says:

“It is utterly depressing that there are so many people like her facing decades of payments, limited capacity to buy a home and a debt burden that can repel potential life partners. For starters, it’s a shared failure of parenting and loan underwriting.  But perhaps the biggest share lies with colleges and universities because they have the most knowledge of the financial aid process. And I would argue that they had an obligation to counsel students like Ms. Munna, who got in too far over their heads.”

Forbes has a related story called “Five Options For Grads With Student Debt But No Job.”

“Taking out student loans is as common among college students as posting pictures on Facebook. But as recent graduates try to find their gainful employment at a time when one in five under-24-year-olds is unemployed, making monthly payments on student loans can range from tough to impossible. . . . Student loans are one of the stickiest types of debt around.  Unlike credit card debt, mortgages and most business loans, the money you owe on your student loans won’t be forgiven, even if you file for bankruptcy.”

Large student loan debts can also scare away potential spouses and make it harder to find a mate.  Many young people do not want to marry a person who brings the baggage of a $100,000+ debt into a marriage.  The worst situation is when two young people meet in school and marry and have a combined debt of the husband and wife.  I know of a young couple that met after graduating from law school while they pursued graduate law degrees.  They both have over $150,000 in school loans.  They newly weds now have a combined loan debt that exceeds the cost of a nice home in most parts of the country.

Macro Express – A Must Have Program to Automate Repetitive Text & Keystrokes

Macro Express is a very inexpensive software program that is a tremendous time saver.  I have used it every day in my law practice since December of 2007 when I purchased my first license.  Macro Express has saved me hundreds of hours of time.   Everybody in my small law firm uses Macro Express and loves it.

We use Macro Express to zap text (short, medium and long) into any program displayed on the computer screen.  If you are like me and most people who spend time in front of a computer, there are many times when you will type the same thing over and over.  Imagine if you could type text once and then on you command have the exact text inserted automatically where you want it to go?  Think of all the time you would save.

In my practice, people are constantly asking me the same questions over and over by email.  With Macro Express, I can respond to a question for the umpteenth time in a matter of seconds.  I just invoke the macro short key command and Macro Express then inserts the text that I wrote previously one time.  A macro can be a single letter or digit or an unlimited number of pages of text.  You create each macro and decide what the macro will say.  After you create a macro, you can easily edit it if necessary.

Macro Express is the premier Windows macro utility.  With Macro Express, you can record, edit and play back mouse and keyboard macros. Its powerful tools and robust features will make you more productive.

Why Use Macros?

A macro is a series of written instructions or recorded keystrokes and mouse actions.  With a single keystroke, play back these activities at a much faster speed than can be performed manually. Eliminate wasted time and the risk of error that typically occur when performing repetitive tasks.  Do It Smarter, Faster & Cheaper.  Macro Express pays for itself after just a few hours of increased productivity.

  • Automate boring, repetitive computer tasks.
  • Get the job done quicker, more reliably and with less stress.
  • Reduce wear and tear on wrists and hands.

Richard Keyt’s Macro Express Demo Video

Buy Macro Express Now for $39.95

Do yourself a favor and make you computer life much easier and make yourself more efficient and productive, buy Macro Express now for $39.95 by clicking on the following link to go to the Macro Express website where you can purchase and download this amazing time saver.

Buy Macro Express at:  http://tinyurl.com/24p2fm6.

For Power Users & Programmers:  Buy Macro Express PRO Now for $59.95

If you are a power computer user, you may want to purchase Macro Express Pro, which has dozens of new features designed for the advanced macro user.  To compare the standard vs. Pro, see the comparison table.

Buy Macro Express Pro now for $59.95 by clicking on the following link to go to the Macro Express website to purchase and download this great program.

Buy Macro Express Pro at:  http://tinyurl.com/2c2eta7

Disclosure:  If you buy the program, I get 30% of the purchase price.  I have recommended this program on my website for many years, but before June 24, 2010, I never received anything for my recommendations.  P.S.  I do not recommend any software that I do not personally use and give the highest rating.

More Blumenthal Claims on Vietnam Emerge

Yesterday the Connecticut Democrat party picked the proven liar and war-hero-wanna-be Richard Blumenthal to be its candidate for Chris Dodd’s seat in the United States Senate.  New York Times:  “Broader newspaper archival searches have continued to turn up claims by Attorney General Richard Blumenthal of Connecticut that he was a Vietnam War veteran, even though he did not serve in the war. . . . ‘In Vietnam,’ Mr. Blumenthal said, according to the article, ‘we had to endure taunts and insults, and no one said, ‘Welcome home.’ I say welcome home’.””

The liar repeatedly said that he was insulted and degraded by people when he returned from Vietnam.  Not having served in Vietnam, he bought into and repeated a lie perpetrated by the media – that Vietnam vets were the subject of ridicule and insults.  I was in the United States Air Force from September of 1970 to May of 1976.  Five of those years I was stationed in the U.S.  I almost always lived in town, not on base, and wore my uniform to and from work.  Not once did anybody ever insult me or give me grief because I was in the military or because I served in Vietnam.  I do not remember any of my military friends ever having it happen to them.

See “Critics weigh Blumenthal’s words” and “Blumenthal wins Dem endorsement by acclamation at CT convention.”  See also “Former DNC member says Blumenthal lies “unconscionable.

Go to Top