I-300 Public Hearing Demonstrates Demand for Social Consumption Venues in Denver!

I-300 Campaign Challenges City and State Rules that Frustrate the Intent of the Voter-Approved Initiative.

Click Here to Support Our Litigation

The I-300 campaign thanks all of our supporters and community members who signed our letter and showed up to the public hearing on June 13. Nearly 400 supporters signed our letter which was hand delivered to the Licensing Director at the hearing. We are waiting for an update from city officials about the future of the initiative and the final rules. As you know, our campaign has faced incredible resistance and hesitation from rule-makers and influence by special interest groups that oppose social cannabis consumption. One of the biggest challenges we face, which frustrates the intent of the initiative, is the Liquor Enforcement Rule that prohibits cannabis consumption on any liquor licensed establishment or their premises, at any time, under any circumstances (even with city approval), and even at times when alcohol is not being served. In addition, the city’s proposed rules drastically extend the prohibition on dual consumption so that I-300 permits cannot even be issued at special events, or on the “same parcel of land” with other licensed establishments, which jeopardizes the opportunity for most multi-unit buildings such as mini-malls or shared complexes, where dispensaries or liquor licensed establishments could be located.

Read About the Public Hearing and I-300 Rules in the Denver Post:

Emmett Reistroffer, campaign director for Initiative 300 and a member of the city’s Social Consumption Advisory Committee, said “99 percent” of business people who were interested in applying for a social consumption license are “no longer interested” because the proposed rules are too restrictive.

“When I read the rules today, we can’t even get off the ground,” Reistroffer said.

Entrepreneurs will not spend thousands of dollars on clean-air systems, walled patios and security measures, among other potential expenses, when the potential for profit is questionable: “For what, to sell a cup of coffee?” Reistroffer asked.

Help us stand up for the rights of cannabis consumers and responsible businesses that should be able to permit designated consumption areas under voter-approved, Amendment 64 and Initiative 300 – Please help us fight state and city rule-making overreach!

Click Here to Support Our Litigation!