Lower crop, quality boost Karnataka tobacco prices

Tobacco prices for bright grade are holding around Rs 140 a kg at majority of the auction platforms in Karnataka. “As the auction enters the 15th day in the State, prices are steady and ruling high due to improvement in quality of the crop this year,” K.N. Vishakantaiah, Tobacco Board Regional Manager, told Business Line.

Prices are ruling 15 per cent higher than last year and about 30 buyers/platform are active. So far, the Tobacco Board has marketed 7,564 bales at an average price of 120.53 a kg. According to B.V. Javare Gowda, President, Karnataka Tobacco Growers Association, prices are better than last year due to lower crop. But growers’ expectation is not matching the current market price as all farm inputs have become dearer.

 The Tobacco Board is planning to conduct mock e-auction in few platforms in Karnataka on October 19. The Board Chairman is visiting the tobacco-growing region in the State during October 18-19 to interact with the growers and to participate in the mock drill.

RIVERSTONE HEALTH IS TOBACCO FREE

RiverStone Health went tobacco-free Monday, making it the 48th medical or healthcare organization in Montana to implement the policy. The new policy applies to anyone on its campus and prohibits the use of all tobacco products. Riverstone's health board adopted the plan from the organization's leadership training program that was asked to develop an idea that would make a difference in the community.

Linda Turner, who works in RiverStone Health's environmental services, is a member of the program. "We want everyone to be able to breathe fresh, clean air and not have anybody... especially because we have WIC here and the clinic, so there's children and stuff and everybody deserves to breathe clean air."

According to RiverStone Health, about 175 Montanans die from secondhand smoke each year. Turner says the new policy follows the mission of RiverStone Health: to improve life, health and safety. Employees say they will enforce the policy through education.

Two arrested in Kent for cigarette smuggling

Legal cigarettes you can buy from this site: camel, marlboro, pall mall, vogue. 

Agents for the Comptroller's Field Enforcement Division and deputies from the Kent County Sheriff's Office reportedly seized 7,000 packs of contraband cigarettes and arrested two alleged smugglers Sept. 21. According to a news release from the comptroller's office, Robert Wierzbinski, 36, and Angelica Wierzbinski, 37, both of Flushing, N.Y., were charged with one count each of transporting unstamped cigarettes and possession of contraband cigarettes.

The comptroller's office said the Wierzbinkis were arrested during a traffic stop on U.S. Route 301 in Kent County. The pair reportedly possessed $42,000 worth of contraband cigarettes. According to court documents on the Maryland Judiciary website, Robert and Angelica Wierzbinski were both released Sept. 22 after each posted $35,000 bail. “I'd like to thank Corporal Harry Kettner and Sheriff John F. Price of the Kent County Sheriff's Office for helping my agents continue the fight against cigarette smuggling in Maryland,” said Comptroller Peter Franchot in a statement.

“As soon as Corporal Kettner realized this wasn't a routine traffic stop, his office contacted my agency's Field Enforcement Division and agents were immediately dispatched to assist with the investigation.” The current laws make transportation of unstamped cigarettes in the state a felony carrying a maximum $50 per carton fine and up to two years imprisonment. Possession of contraband cigarettes is classified as a misdemeanor, with a maximum fine of $1,000 and no more than one year in jail.

“Every smuggler caught is one more opportunity to crack down on illegal activity and I applaud the agencies involved for helping to aggressively uphold and enforce Maryland's tax laws,” Franchot said. The comptroller is supporter of harsher penalties and stiffer fines for charges of transporting unstamped cigarettes and possession of contraband cigarettes. “The current penalties for cigarette smuggling aren't strong enough to deter people from continually trying to transport cigarettes illegally. Many times, my agency has found those who are arrested are repeat offenders, and that is unforgivable” Franchot said.

Marin County city considers tough smoking ban

Ardian Totolaku, an unemployed restaurant worker, believes in his God-given right to smoke cigarettes. He likes to smoke while he is hanging out on the streets of downtown San Rafael and in the comfort of his three-bedroom condo on a tree-lined street not far from Highway 101. Soon, however, the 44-year-old Albanian immigrant might be prohibited from smoking in either place. The San Rafael City Council will decide today whether to ban smoking in more than 40 percent of the city’s private residences or while sitting or standing on any sidewalk downtown.

“It's not right,” Totolaku said as he lingered outside the Fourth Street Starbucks on a recent afternoon. He took a last drag from his cigarette and added: “The government is going too far. Humans die because the Lord decides when it is time to go, not because of smoking.” But the City Council is not waiting for divine intervention. The proposed ordinance would prohibit smoking tobacco or marijuana in any multi-family residential unit, condominium or apartment – more than 10,000 of the city’s 24,000 dwellings.

 In addition to the downtown ban, the measure would restrict smoking near any business or multi-family residence. It also would prohibit smoking at public events, playgrounds and outdoor dining areas. The proposed ban, one of the toughest in the state, is similar to restrictions adopted by Sonoma County and the cities of Belmont and Richmond. Supporters of the San Rafael measure say it would protect bystanders from the health hazards associated with secondhand smoke, a known carcinogen that can seep through ventilation ducts, doorways and open windows in residential units with shared walls.

 “The person that is being subjected to the smokers’ behavior has rights as well,” said Mayor Gary Phillips, a supporter of the measure. “Particularly when you take into account the health factors, we feel it is best to weigh in on the side of the person who is being subjected to the smoke.” San Rafael, in eastern Marin County roughly 15 miles north of San Francisco, is one of California’s wealthier cities, with a median household income of $71,339, according to its website. San Rafael is a commuter city in the heart of Marin County that is home to more than 57,000 people. A statewide survey released in 2009 showed that only 7.5 percent of Marin County residents smoked, the lowest rate in the state.

 If passed, the ban would require a final vote Oct. 15 before going into effect in mid-November. The ordinance would apply to all tobacco, marijuana and hookah smokers – even users of medical marijuana who have a doctor’s prescription. Violators could face fines ranging from $100 to $500, depending on the number of times they have been cited. The proposal has set the stage for a fierce fight over how far the government should go in regulating people’s private lives. City officials say they have received roughly 30 emails and calls from residents who say the ban would leave smokers with few places to go.

 Smokers in downtown San Rafael last week said the government should butt out. Standing on a curb in San Rafael, Chris Gatty, a human resources manager from Fairfax, complained between puffs on his cigarette that the government is unfairly targeting smokers who stand still – walking while smoking still would be permitted. “While we're at it, cleaning up the streets, we should get rid of the homeless, too,” said Gatty, 42, gesturing toward a group of disheveled men on a busy corner. “Smokers are being unfairly targeted by the government.

If I lived here in a condo, I’d move.” But Jennifer Harper – Gatty’s friend and a nonsmoker – said she was “all for the police state.” Harper said she had tried unsuccessfully to persuade Gatty to quit smoking. And as a hairdresser working downtown, Harper said she had to close the door of the salon from time to time to keep secondhand smoke at bay. “I'm all for it,” Harper said of the ban. As he took a cigarette break on the sidewalk, Ben Arlington, a San Francisco resident who runs ticketing operations for concerts, wondered where he would smoke if the ban were approved. “I suppose I would stand in the street,” said Arlington, 34, gazing at the traffic. “I think that would be problematic for me, though. I value my limbs.”

Wednesday Sector Leaders: Cigarettes & Tobacco, Education & Training Services

www.freetobacco.info - free tobacco blog with fresh articles.

In trading on Wednesday, cigarettes & tobacco shares were relative leaders, up on the day by about 1.3%. Leading the group were shares of Star Scientific (STSI), up about 6.7% and shares of Alliance One International (AOI) up about 1.2% on the day.

Also showing relative strength are education & training services shares, up on the day by about 0.7% as a group, led by New Oriental Education & Technology (EDU), trading higher by about 4.4% and Career Education (CECO), trading higher by about 3.8% on Wednesday.

Marijuana now legal for medical use in Connecticut

Connecticut on Monday became the 17th state to legalize marijuana for medical use, but patients with any of the 11 conditions allowed to use it under the new law won't get state-sanctioned access to the drug for at least several more months. William Rubenstein, commissioner of the state Department of Consumer Protection, said Monday that a system for supply and distribution won't be set up until sometime next year. "It's an enormously complicated task," he said.

"The law was signed May 31, and we're still doing our due diligence to make sure we have a system to supply a safe product that's free from theft and diversion and abuse." In setting up the system for Connecticut, he said, the department is taking lessons from the other states with medical marijuana laws about what works and what doesn't. "No one wants us to be like California," he said, referring to what many consider a poorly regulated distribution system there that makes the drug too easily available and subject to abuse. A full set of regulations for Connecticut's supply and distribution system will be prepared for consideration by the state Legislature's Regulations Review Committee by July, Rubenstein said.

The public will have a chance to comment on proposed regulations at a public hearing before then. "Connecticut's law has been called the most restrictive in the country, but I prefer to call it the best designed," he said. Under the law, patients with AIDS, glaucoma, Parkinson's disease, multiple sclerosis, epilepsy and six other conditions will be able to access a one-month supply provided they meet a set of conditions designed to keep tight controls on the product. Their doctor must first register the patient with Consumer Protection, certifying that they have been diagnosed with one of the illnesses and that they would benefit from using medical marijuana, and then the patient must complete the registration with a photo, identification and other information. Use of medical marijuana is prohibited in vehicles, workplaces, schools, dormitories and all public places, and in the presence of anyone under age 18.

Rubenstein said a temporary registration system for doctors and patients has been set up on Consumer Protection's website. Anyone on the temporary list would be allowed to possess marijuana they obtain on their own while the department establishes the official supply and distribution system, he said. He advised anyone with one of the 11 conditions who believes they would benefit from using medical marijuana to see their doctor. "They should make an appointment with their physician to discuss the appropriateness of medical marijuana for their situation," he said. Under the law, all marijuana sold for medical purposes must be grown in Connecticut in indoor, secure facilities, and only 10 producers will licensed.

A network of standalone pharmacists will distribute the marijuana, which would be available in the commonly known smokable form, as well as in forms that many consider more suitable for medical uses. These can include products that can be inhaled in a vaporizer, edible products and tinctures that can be applied under the tongue or other ways, Rubenstein said. Department staff, he said, are talking to pharmacists and representatives of the medical marijuana industry about how best to create a supply and distribution system in Connecticut. Matt Simon, legislative analyst for the Marijuana Policy Project, a Washington, D.C.-based advocacy group, said it is unclear whether Connecticut's highly restrictive law will be workable.

"Connecticut is trying to make sure the dispensing operations are done in a professional manner, but it remains to be seen whether it will be too onerous," he said. The biggest challenge, he said, may be in attracting producers. Maine, he said, provides one example of a state that appears to have successfully set up a workable system of eight dispensaries that are run "like a health care facility," Simon said. Carol Jones, director of medical case management at the Alliance for Living, which serves those with AIDS and HIV in New London County, said the organization is hopeful that state officials will keep the needs of patients in mind as they write the regulations. "We at Alliance for Living certainly hope that all of our clients have access to any medication that is approved to treat their disease or side effects of the disease," she said. "Now that medical marijuana is legal, should our clients need that we certainly are in favor of them having access to whatever medication they may need."

Medical marijuana ordinance to get final Los Angeles City Council vote Tuesday

The Los Angeles City Council will decide Tuesday whether to repeal its ban on storefront medical marijuana dispensaries or to have voters decide whether to squash the law or let it survive. The City Council in July banned all storefront medical marijuana dispensaries, but allowed patients and licensed caregivers to grow their own cannabis. The so-called "gentle ban" ordinance also allowed three or fewer parties to collectively grow pot.

Estimates by the city put the number of dispensaries in the city at close to 1,000. Medical cannabis supporters bashed the law, saying high-quality marijuana is difficult to grow and the gentle ban would deny cancer, AIDS and other chronically ill patients one of the only medicines that provides relief from painful medical treatments. The Committee to Protect Patients and Neighborhoods, a coalition of medical marijuana advocacy groups -- Americans for Safe Access, the Greater Los Angeles Collective Alliance and the United Food and Commercial Workers Local 770 -- gathered 49,021 signatures to ask voters to overturn the law.

The tally was well over the 27,425 signatures needed to qualify the measure, and the referendum was certified by the City Clerk last month. "We have always been seeking a fair compromise to resolve this complicated issue," said Rick Icaza, president of UFCW Local 770, which represents about 500 workers at 50 marijuana dispensaries. "We would like to see a law that regulates and restricts medical cannabis dispensaries, but preserves safe access for patients, and good union jobs for dispensary employees." Councilman Jose Huizar said "storefront medical marijuana dispensaries are not contemplated under state law and are therefore illegal" and "nothing the City Council will do tomorrow or in the future will change that." "At this point, I'm more concerned with enforcement on illegal, for-profit dispensaries, which the federal government is currently engaged in," Huizar said. "While I support the use of marijuana for medicinal purposes, the state needs to create a better way of providing access for seriously ill patients while removing the scores of profiteers and recreational users who currently dominate the market."

The clerk's verification of the signatures forced three options in front of the council. The panel must decide whether to repeal the ordinance, as favored by the petitioners, put the referendum on the March 5 citywide election ballot, or call for a special election. A special election would cost taxpayers an estimated $4 million, according to the city clerk, and is likely to be the unpopular option. Also Tuesday, the council will vote on a resolution sponsored by City Council President Herb Wesson that asks state lawmakers to fix state law to give municipalities clear guidelines on how to regulate the distribution of medical marijuana. The existing law "fails to respond to fundamental issues and ... has been inappropriately used as a legal shield to stymie local governments from solving many resulting problems," according to Wesson's measure. Council members are expected to discuss options to replace the gentle ban if they decide not to repeal the ordinance, but voters do.