Filed under: Hemp&Law, HempTherapy, hemp in general | Tags: AIDS, California, cancer, cannabis, ganja, grow, hashish, hemp, marijuana, medical cannabis, medical marijuana, pot, seattle, skunk, weed
Seattle, WA — The state Health Department on Thursday defined a two-month supply of medical marijuana as 24 ounces of usable pot and up to 15 plants, a limit designed to end a decade of confusion over how much patients are allowed to have.
But patient advocates criticized the limit as arbitrary and insufficient, saying it could leave sick people in danger of going to jail, and they threatened to sue to prevent the rule from taking effect.
“We looked at what appears to make sense for most of the patients in the state,” said department spokesman Donn Moyer. “There will be some who don’t need as much, and there may be some who need more.”
Washington was among the first states to approve the medical use of marijuana to treat AIDS, cancer and other debilitating illnesses. The law, passed in 1998, allowed patients a 60-day supply of marijuana, but didn’t say how much that was. Over the years, several patients with a doctor’s authorization to use marijuana have been arrested by police who deemed them to have more pot than necessary.
Patients who need more marijuana than allowed by the new rule can make that argument to a judge if they’re arrested.
The limit adopted Thursday takes effect Nov. 2, and nearly matches the rule used by Oregon, which allows 24 ounces plus six mature plants and 18 immature ones. Some California counties allow more marijuana, but many of the dozen states with medical marijuana laws allow much less than Washington’s new rule – just an ounce or two, in some cases.
The Health Department decided against using a mature immature plant distinction largely because it didn’t want police to have to determine what constituted a mature plant.
Instead, officials went with a limit of 15 plants at any stage of growth.
Law enforcement officers “really just want a line in the sand,” Moyer said, and the 15-plant limit allows patients flexibility to decide how to grow them.
Patient advocates scoffed at that. Douglas Hiatt, a Seattle attorney who represents patients, noted that only female marijuana plants are usable as medicine, and about half of all plants growing from seed grow to become male. So to get to 15 usable plants, a patient or provider might have to plant 30 – in violation of the law.
“No patient I know of anywhere in the state is in compliance with that number,” Hiatt said.
And, he said, the 24-ounce limit for dried bud might work for patients who smoke marijuana, but not for those who eat it. He called the limits “completely nonscientific.”
“We all know this is a political decision that doesn’t have anything to do with the reality of patients’ lives.”
The Health Department initially considered setting the limit at 35 ounces plus 100 square feet of plant canopy. But Democratic Gov. Chris Gregoire found those numbers too high and urged officials to get more input from law enforcement and doctors.
The Health Department did so, and cut the numbers accordingly. Law enforcement had worried that drug dealers could use a higher limit to conceal illicit marijuana growing operations.
The Washington Association of Sheriffs and Police Chiefs’ policy director, Joanna Arlow, did not immediately return a call seeking comment Thursday. But she previously called the 24-ounce limit “reasonable.”
Steve Sarich, a patient and advocate from Kirkland, said he would go to court to seek an injunction to prevent the rule from taking effect. He argued that it was arbitrary, and he took no comfort in knowing that patients could try to prove in court they need more than the limit – something that would likely require a doctor’s testimony.
“How is the doctor going to prove you need more plants? Is the doctor going to prove you’re not very good at growing,” he said. “Where is the clarity this rule was supposed to provide?”
Source: Associated Press
Filed under: Hemp&Law, HempTherapy, hemp in general | Tags: Arnold Schwarzenegger, California, cannabis, ganja, hashish, hemp, marijuana, pot, Proposition 215, skunk, supreme court, weed
Sacramento, CA — Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger has vetoed a bill sponsored by medical marijuana advocates that would have protected most employees from being fired for testing positive for pot that they used outside the workplace with their doctor’s approval.
The measure, AB 2279 by Assemblyman Mark Leno, D-San Francisco, would have overturned a state Supreme Court ruling in January that allowed employers to punish workers for using medical marijuana that was legalized by a state ballot measure in 1996.
Under Leno’s measure, the only workers who could have been fired for using medical marijuana would have been those in safety-related or law enforcement jobs.In its 5-2 ruling, the Supreme Court said the initiative, Proposition 215, exempted medical marijuana patients and their caregivers from state prosecution, but wasn’t intended to limit an employer’s authority to fire workers for violating federal drug laws.
Schwarzenegger used the same rationale in his veto message Tuesday.
“I am concerned with interference in employment decisions as they relate to marijuana use,” the governor wrote. “Employment protection was not a goal of the initiative as passed by voters in 1996.”
Medical marijuana supporters disagreed.
Source: San Francisco Chronicle
Filed under: Hemp&Law, HempTherapy, hemp in general | Tags: California, cannabis, ganja, hashish, hemp, marijuana, medical cannabis, medical marijuana, medical research, pot, Santa Cruz, skunk, WAMM, WAMM Festival, weed
Santa Cruz, CA — Thousands of medicinal marijuana patients and supporters attended WAMMfest to celebrate and learn about the herbal medicine Saturday.
Though medical marijuana patients were able to smoke their medicine at the event that featured music, crafts and speeches, that portion of the festivities was in question until this week. After failing to muster the votes to lift the city smoking ban in parks in a prior meeting, the council Tuesday agreed to do so. Only those with a medical marijuana identification card were allowed to smoke in a specially-designated tent Saturday.
Wo/Men’s Alliance for Medical Marijuana co-founder Valerie Corral said the event is an opportunity to normalize the use of medicinal marijuana and bring its members’ stories to the public eye.
“Almost 200 of our members have died in the past 15 years since our inception,” said Corral. “We do this work for a lot of reasons and for all aspects of illness. We get to be with people at the most important time in their lives when they are facing death. We are here to take care of each other and to be by their bedside and it takes you to places you can’t even imagine.”
WAMM is a collective of patients and caregivers that offers free medical marijuana to seriously ill patients with a doctor’s recommendation and aims to, provide hope and build community.
Santa Cruz police reported that there were no problems during the event, and that the festival provided its own security.
Organizers began setting up the celebration of the herbal drug at 6 a.m. Saturday and said by the end of the day they expected to see 2,500 visitors.
Colorful tents filled San Lorenzo Park with vendors offering a range of organic hemp soaps from Dr. Bronner’s Magic Soaps to bright tie-dye shirts and jewelry. Plastic marijuana leaf tiaras were also for sale in addition to sunglasses and hemp bags.
Councilman Tony Madrigal, who spoke at the event, said he was happy the council was able find a compromise that allowed patients to use their medication in a controlled, confined and secure area, while still taking part in a community event.
“This is an example of the community working together with the local government to find a solution for many of the problems the city faces,” Madrigal said. “People are loyal to WAMM and come to celebrate the good work that WAMM does.”
A newly expanded children’s area was moved to the front of the park to invite members of the community to the family friendly event said WAMM member Babianna Mince.
“It’s a family affair here. My husband is working security and I am in charge of the kids area,” Mince said. “We have had about 20 kids come by since noon, which is more than we have ever had.”
A survivor of uterine, bone and breast cancer, Mince said that being a medicinal marijuana patient has allowed her to participate in events such as the festival and get through 40 surgeries within the past five years.
“I feel like after that I can get through anything,” Mince said.
A small memorial for WAMM members who have died was set up by the medicinal marijuana tent, featuring their names and faces.
Source: Santa Cruz Sentinel
Filed under: Hemp&Law, HempTherapy, hemp in general | Tags: California, cannabis, ganja, hashish, hemp, Los Angeles, marijuana, medical cannabis, medical marijuana, pot, San Diego, skunk, therapeutic use, weed
California — Guidelines recently issued by the state attorney general have had little effect on the Inland’s regulation of medical marijuana.
Last month, Attorney General Jerry Brown said licensed state cooperatives or less formal collectives are legal under California law. Operators of for-profit storefront dispensaries may be arrested and prosecuted, he said. Brown’s opinion is nonbinding.
He issued the guidelines as the San Bernardino County Board of Supervisors decided it would continue efforts to overturn the state’s 2003 Medical Marijuana Program Act, also known as Prop. 215. The state has issued a little more than 23,500 medical marijuana cards since 2004, according to the California Department of Public Health.
Earlier this summer, the state’s 4th District Court of Appeal in San Diego rejected claims by San Diego and San Bernardino counties that federal statutes outlawing marijuana pre-empt state law. The court also rejected San Bernardino County’s argument that issuing medical marijuana identification cards violated the state’s constitution.
San Bernardino County spokesman David Wert said Brown’s opinion probably would not affect the county’s decision to appeal.
“We’re asking for clarification on the law,” he said. “We’re doing this on behalf of the sheriff’s department. The county is prepared to abide by any law on the books. The Board of Supervisors has never taken a stance on medical marijuana or even on the cards.”
San Bernardino County has not issued any medical marijuana cards.
Riverside County is one of 41 across the state to issue identification cards after patients show proof of residency and a doctor’s recommendation. It issued about 300 cards a year, which require annual renewal. The cards cost $153, which funds the medical marijuana program. An ounce of marijuana at a dispensary can cost up to $400.
Despite medical marijuana card availability, Riverside County and almost every city in it has banned marijuana dispensaries. Advocates say there are at least two medical marijuana outlets in Palm Springs.
A Riverside dispensary was raided and closed last week, said Lanny Swerdlow, a registered nurse and longtime cannabis proponent. Riverside police would not discuss it.
Michael Jeandron, spokesman for Riverside County District Attorney Rod Pacheco, said Pacheco has seen Brown’s guidelines and is reviewing them. But marijuana dispensaries are illegal in California, Jeandron said.
Medical marijuana opponents say they think Brown’s opinion indicates support for drug legalization. The Inland Valley Drug Free Community Coalition, a Rancho Cucamonga organization that includes parents and law enforcement, recently sent Brown a letter, asking him to back San Bernardino County’s court battle. The group also wants Brown to support communities’ right to ban marijuana dispensaries.
“It appears he is siding with the drug legalization groups,” said coalition spokesman Roger Anderson. “What we want is for Brown to back off from his guidelines to law enforcement. They’ve made drug trafficking and drug dealing in California legal.”
Brown’s spokeswoman, Christine Gasparac, disagreed.
“The guidelines were written with input from law enforcement and patient advocates,” she said. “Prop. 215 is the law in California. The guidelines really are meant to clarify how to use medical marijuana. We’re not taking sides on this.”
Swerdlow called Brown’s guidelines workable, but he said he doesn’t think Inland law enforcement officials will consider them. He said local officials repeatedly had ignored requests to discuss interpretation of the state’s medical marijuana law before Brown issued his opinion.
Patients would like assurances that they won’t be prosecuted if they grow enough plants to supply small groups, such as 36 plants for six people, Swerdlow said.
“Patients are afraid to grow with other patients,” he said. “A lot of people are growing for themselves because they are afraid of arrest.
“Before we even worry about storefront dispensaries, we need to discuss growing,” Swerdlow said.
Meanwhile, patients will grow for personal use, go to Los Angeles or Palm Springs or rely on delivery services to avoid prosecution, he said.
Filed under: Hemp&Law, HempTherapy, hemp in general | Tags: California, cannabis, Dea, ganja, hashish, hemp, marijuana, medical cannabis, medical marijuana, pot, Santa Cruz, skunk, war on drugs, weed
CA — A landmark decision for all Californian’s quietly made history on August 20th in a Santa Cruz courtroom. For the first time since 1996, when the Compassionate Use Act was passed, the federal authorities have been charged with violating the 10th Amendment for harassing medical marijuana patients and state authorities.
The case of Santa Cruz vs. Mukasey, was heard by U.S. District Court Judge Jeremy Fogel, who said the Bush Administration’s request to dismiss a lawsuit by Santa Cruz city and county officials, and the Wo/Men’s Alliance for Medical Marijuana (WAMM), wasn’t going to happen.
In a recent telephone interview with Alan Hopper, an ACLU counsel familiar with the case, I asked him what came next?
”The plaintiff will get a get a court-ordered discovery document that will allow them to get documents, and even depositions, from the federal authorities to support their claims,” he explained.
So now it’s the city, county, and WAMM’s turn to prove their case against the federal government. The court has recognized a concerted effort by the federal government to sabotage state medical marijuana laws, which violates the U.S. Constitution. The significance of this ruling, the first of its kind, cannot be overstated.
California voters may finally get what they asked for a dozen years ago. When the court said that the federal government had gone out of its way to arrest and prosecute some of the most legitimate doctors, patients, caregivers, and dispensary owners that had been working with state and local officials, it finally drew a line-in-the sand.
An example of the federal authorities violations was their pursuit of WAMM. This non-profit group has been around for many years, and has been fully supported by the city and county of Santa Cruz. They have been referred to, by officials, as the model medical marijuana patient’s collective.
The group was functioning so smoothly that the city even allowed them to hold regular meetings to distribute marijuana to its patients on the steps of city hall! The federal agents still went after them, which brought about this court decision.
When the ACLU filed this lawsuit to stop them from targeting medical marijuana providers and patients, they opened a door that may finally lead to no federal interference in California’s medical marijuana law.
We must not forget that medical marijuana brings in about $100 million each year in tax revenue. Conferring total legitimacy to the law will allow this cash flow to continue, and hopefully, increase over time.
When the judge ruled the feds were threatening physicians who recommended marijuana, he set the stage for regaining patient’s rights. The ruling clearly pointed out that the feds were also threatening government officials who issue medical marijuana cards, and interfered with municipal zoning plans.
In the summation, the court found that, “There was a calculated pattern of selective arrests and prosecutions by the federal government with the intent to render California’s medical marijuana laws impossible to implement and therefore forced Californian’s and their political subdivisions to re-criminalize medical marijuana.”
In a recent column, I mentioned California’s Attorney General Jerry Brown had passed out an 11-page directive that all law agencies were to go by. I expressed concern that the federal authorities would ignore those guidelines, but upon finding out about this recent ruling I now have some cause for hope.
It sure sounded like Hopper was looking forward to the next phase, and he seemed confident that positive change lay ahead. Asked which presidential candidate would be more amenable to upholding medical marijuana laws, he cleverly replied that he thought they both would be willing to work for change. He could be right too. This is a year of change.
This on-going battle with the federal authorities ignoring California’s laws has been well-documented in the past. Why hasn’t there been more coverage for such an epic ruling? Its potential as breakthrough legislation is something all Californian’s should know about in my opinion.
The war against medical marijuana hasn’t been won yet, but this could be the breakthrough everybody’s waited for. At the core of the war waged by the federal government against the voter’s will, is the failed War on Drugs by the Bush Administration. It’s about time someone told them to back off.
As It Stands, we can score this as a successful round for state’s rights.
Source: Times-Standard
Filed under: HempTherapy, hemp in general | Tags: ABC, Arcata, California, cannabis, Chicago, ganja, hashish, hemp, marijuana, medical cannabis, medical marijuana, pot, skunk, weed
Arcata, Calif. — When Stephen Gasparas arrived in Humboldt County in late 2004, he was driving a VW Westfalia pop-top camper on the verge of breaking down and had only $100 in his pocket.
Gasparas, who ran a flooring business in Chicago before heading west, seems to have found far greener pastures in Humboldt County’s medical marijuana industry.
Less than four years later, the owner of the Arcata iCenter, a collective marijuana dispensary, is now driving a new hybrid Toyota Highlander and bringing in about $100,000 a year. (And judging by the foot traffic in and out of the iCenter, that figure is a modest estimate.)
But Gasparas, 38, is just one of many in Humboldt County and throughout California benefiting from the booming medical marijuana industry.
Exactly how much the Golden State has made in pot profits is a hazy figure, mostly because California doesn’t keep exact numbers on medical marijuana sales taxes.
It’s estimated that $143 million in medical marijuana sales have netted $11.4 million in state and local taxes annually, based on registered businesses, California State Board of Equalization spokesperson Anita Gore said. And those estimates are small compared to a 2006 report co-authored by California NORML state coordinator Dale Gieringer, which said that Californians consumed between $870 million and $2 billion worth of medical marijuana per year.
Of course, marijuana is nothing new to Humboldt County.
Humboldt, part of Northern California’s Emerald Triangle, has long been known for its high-grade marijuana crop, which has been immortalized on merchandise including “Got Humboldt?” T-shirts, skateboards that feature weed and the words “Humboldt Gold,” and an upcoming movie named — what else? — “Humboldt County.” One recent study by Steven Hackett, an economics professor at Humboldt State University, estimated marijuana brings in as much as a half-billion dollars to the county’s economy.
Those who think Hackett’s number is much too high probably have not wandered through the streets of cities like Arcata, enjoying the sights — and scents — of Humboldt.
At the recent I-Block Party, a fundraiser for Arcata’s sister city (Camoapa, Nicaragua), the heavy scent of pot hung in the warm air as the crowd grooved to a reggae band.
Humboldt Glassblowers, a local shop featuring work by local artists, offers a seemingly endless supply of gorgeous swirled glass pipes — not to mention hookahs, Frisbees and magazines like “High Times” and “420 Magazine.” There, it seemed hard to go anywhere without smelling ganga, or at least spotting some reference to it.
For years, Humboldt County has enjoyed the benefits of a booming underground economy. But changes to state laws — such as the passage of Proposition 215 in 1996, when voters approved the medical use of marijuana — mean that many engaged in cultivation and sales are trying to follow state medical marijuana laws. Or, at least some of them are making an effort, and in doing so are pouring money into local and state tax coffers.
The City of Arcata declined to disclose specific taxes paid on medical marijuana sales by local businesses, calling that “proprietary information.” But the city’s finance director, Janet Luzzi, said one dispensary in town is among Arcata’s top 25 producers of sales tax, and has been for several quarters.
“It’s not always there,” Luzzi said. “But it’s often there.”
Other medical marijuana dispensaries, however, recently received written reminders from Luzzi.
“Not all of them were paying taxes,” she said.
And taxes aside, most here acknowledge marijuana sales have for years contributed to county finances.
Vocal medical marijuana advocate Martha Devine was sitting on a park bench in the flower-lined Arcata Plaza, near a large circle of people kicking around a hacky sack and dozens of dancers. A steel drum band was playing for an enthusiastic crowd, and shoppers were wandering in and out of stores.
“The economy of Humboldt County would have ceased to exist a long time ago without it,” said Devine, glancing around the plaza. “This county was built on marijuana.”
Devine, who’s known to some here as “Granny Green Genes,” said this place was a ghost town when she arrived in Humboldt 32 years ago. She’s witnessed the decline of the county’s other traditional industries, like timber and fisheries, and believes marijuana is largely responsible for Humboldt’s progressive culture and thriving businesses.
“I think it’s really kept our economy going,” Devine said.
While Devine acknowledged that Humboldt’s cannabis cash crop has brought in the bad with the good — things like harder drugs and guns — she said she hopes medical marijuana will help the industry fight the negative aspects associated with black (or even gray) market economies.
She said she does not have a medical marijuana I.D. card “at the present time,” but believes many ill members of the community have benefited tremendously from their “medicine.”
Despite widespread support for medical marijuana, tensions seem especially high in towns like Arcata, where people are struggling to agree on the details of medical marijuana, such as rules for growing and limits for medical marijuana possession.
It’s a debate that’s playing out in counties around California, from historically pot-friendly places like Mendocino County to Los Angeles.
The City of Arcata recently was reviewing the standards of its own marijuana guidelines when the new guidelines by the California Attorney General’s Office were issued late last month.
City staff members are currently reviewing the new statewide guidelines, which set clearer policies on medical marijuana identification cards, plant limits and mandate that dispensaries operate as collectives or cooperatives. Arcata hopes to soon send guidelines to the City Council for its approval.
But whether the new state and local guidelines can help bring peace to Humboldt remains to be seen. In the meantime, many local residents seem uncomfortable in their current position, caught between conflicting and confusing state and federal laws, where medical marijuana dispensaries that pay their state and local taxes may be raided at any time by the Drug Enforcement Administration or other federal agencies.
Some residents complain that a few grow houses have grown out of control, causing problems ranging from skunk-like odors to house fires.
So, even as California’s attorney general seems comfortable delving into the medical marijuana debate, stores like Humboldt Hydroponics refuse to even discuss the topic.
When asked about the issue of medical marijuana and the economy, a man behind the counter of Humboldt Hydroponics shop in Arcata seemed on edge as he immediately insisted he had nothing to say because his shop had “no affiliation” with medical marijuana.
But while standing outside his Arcata iCenter dispensary, Stephen Gasparas seemed to be making a sincere effort to bring medical marijuana out of the shadows and celebrate its contributions to California’s economy. He warmly greeted many of the patients — many of them 20- or 30-something guys — who stopped in the business.
Gasparas, who had battled over permit issues at previous business he ran a few doors down from his medical marijuana dispensary, talked about his efforts to pay sales taxes and give back to the community. He talked about his new fire relief fund. And when an employee came outside to ask him about a patient’s form, Gasparas insisted that personal contact must be made with each doctor who’s suggested a patient try medical marijuana.
“I’m here seven days a week,” he said. “I wouldn’t screw around.”
Note: Humboldt Country’s High: How One Community Thrives on Legal Pot.
Source: ABC News
Filed under: Hemp&Law, HempTherapy, hemp in general | Tags: California, cannabis, Dea, ganja, hashish, hemp, marijuana, medical cannabis, medical marijuana, pot, prop. 215, skunk, weed
California — After more than a decade of roiling confusion over what California’s groundbreaking medical marijuana law and subsequent enabling legislation do and do not allow, state Attorney General Jerry Brown sought to clarify matters by issuing a long-awaited set of guidelines for patients, providers, and law enforcement. In addition to clarifying what is permissible under state law, Brown also hoped to damp down the ongoing conflict between state and federal authorities over medical marijuana in California.
Under the guidelines, medical marijuana dispensaries must operate as not-for-profit collectives or cooperatives, and are prohibited from buying marijuana from growers who are not themselves patients or registered caregivers. The only fees dispensaries can collect are those covering overhead and operating expenses.
The guidelines strongly urge patients to obtain state medical marijuana ID cards and advise police to accept such cards as proof of legitimate medical need. The guidelines also call on police to return seized marijuana to patients who are later proved to be legitimate. They prohibit medical marijuana patients from lighting up near schools and recreation centers or at work, unless employers approve.
Affirming that California’s medical marijuana law is not preempted by federal law, the guidelines further direct “state and local law enforcement officers [to] not arrest individuals or seize marijuana under federal law” when an individual’s conduct is legal under state law.
But while providing protections to patients and non-profit dispensaries organized as co-ops or collectives, the guidelines could provide a green light for law enforcement to go after the store-front dispensaries that have sprung up like mushrooms in some areas of the state. In ballyhooing a Friday raid against a Northridge dispensary by California Bureau of Narcotics Agents, Brown signaled Monday that a crackdown could be looming.
Accusing the Today’s Healthcare dispensary and its operators of criminal behavior by operating a profitable business, Brown went on the offensive. “This criminal enterprise bears no resemblance to the purposes of Proposition 215, which authorized the use of medical marijuana for seriously sick patients,” he said. “Today’s Healthcare is a large-scale, for-profit, commercial business. This deceptively named drug ring is reaping huge profits and flaunting the state’s laws that allow qualified patients to use marijuana for medicinal purposes.”
California law enforcement pronounced itself pleased with the guidelines. Fresno Police Chief Jerry Dyer, president of the California Police Chiefs Association, praised Brown for promulgating them. “Since Proposition 215 was passed, the laws surrounding the use, possession and distribution of medical marijuana became confusing at best. These newly established guidelines are an essential tool for law enforcement and provide the parameters needed for consistent statewide regulation and enforcement.”
Despite the apparent threat to non-compliant dispensaries and their suppliers, most medical marijuana advocates also pronounced themselves generally satisfied with the guidelines. The medical marijuana defense group Americans for Safe Access has been working with Attorney General Brown and his predecessor, Bill Lockyer, for several years in an effort to see guidelines promulgated. ASA spokesman Kris Hermes said this week that while the guidelines are not perfect, they are a step in the right direction.
“We’ve been urging them to come out with an official statement that can direct law enforcement and stop what has been rampant disrespect for state law in some areas,” he said. “From that perspective, the guidelines are a huge step forward. They provide a blueprint for local law enforcement to develop sensible policies around patient encounters, and they recognize the validity and law-abiding nature of medical marijuana dispensaries in California. That’s huge,” said Hermes. “These guidelines are a boon for patients, police, and everyone else in the state and will greatly advance the implementation of state law.”
“Given the vagueness of the initiative and the statutes, the guidelines are pretty good,” said Bruce Mirken, San Francisco-based communications director for the Marijuana Policy Project. “They establish parameters within which the distribution of medical marijuana is to be treated as legitimate and legal. That’s important because some prosecutors have been adamant that there is no legal authority for dispensaries — period. This cuts the legs out from under them,” he said.
“They were about what we expected,” said Dale Gieringer, head of California NORML. “Most of the guidelines are consistent with what our attorneys have been saying and advising their clients to do all along. There are a few problem areas, but these guidelines will help fill the vacuum.”
One problem Gieringer pointed out was that the guidelines say dispensaries may possess and distribute only lawfully cultivated marijuana, and that they cannot purchase from or sell to non-members. “There is nothing in either federal or state law against purchasing marijuana, so we don’t see any legal basis for saying it’s illegal to buy from outside vendors,” he said.
Another potential problem is that the guidelines say that co-ops and collectives should document their activities and record the source of the marijuana they purchase, Gieringer said. “That is going to be problematic until we have some assurance of protection from being arrested by the DEA, and we don’t want to see the cops come in and seize the records, and then bust the growers.”
“While there is much about the guidelines that is positive, we also have some worries about some of the dispensary language,” Mirken said. “Requiring dispensaries to be non-profit is just silly. Is Jerry Brown going to demand that Walgreen’s and Riteaid become charities, too? If society thinks private enterprise and the profit motive are a logical way to distribute goods and services, why not medical marijuana?”
Still, said Mirken, the guidelines are a step in the right direction. “Given that we have all these issues here in California, anything that moves us in the direction of an orderly system with some legal clarity is a good thing. When you have local authorities who just don’t like medical marijuana and are looking for an excuse to bust people, which some of them have been doing all along, this is going to provide protection.”
But at least one Bay Area dispensary operator was not so impressed. “Let’s see how it all plays out,” said Richard Lee, proprietor of Oakland’s Bulldog Coffee Shop and SR-71 dispensary and key promoter of the Oaksterdam scene. “Hopefully, it will help people in more repressed redneck areas and not hurt people in more progressive areas like Oakland and San Francisco.”
Although Brown’s guidelines call for dispensaries to be organized as co-ops or collectives, Lee has not incorporated in that manner and has no plans to. “We’ve been here eight years,” he said. “We were here before they even passed SB 420. Oakland has a system that allows reasonable profits; it’s set up for the clubs to run like any other business, and we are fine with that. Does Jerry Brown really want to come in and mess with Oakland’s system that works?”
While the guidelines could result in a temporary decrease in the number of dispensaries as non-compliant ones either close their doors or have them closed for them by law enforcement, the end result will most likely be more dispensaries opening in areas of that state that are currently underserved because of local law enforcement or official hostility.
“I’m not too worried about a short term decrease in the dispensaries if it brings a little more rigor,” said Gieringer. “Things have been fast and loose, and we have some rogue operators who wouldn’t normally be operating in a legal market. We will lose some of those people, which could result in a short term decrease in availability, but in the medium term, this should be balanced out by the increase in availability in currently underserved areas.”
While not everyone is happy with all aspects of the guidelines, the state of California has now taken a big step toward legitimizing its medical marijuana industry, reducing the confusion surrounding the state’s medical marijuana law, and sending a strong signal to the DEA that it intends to police itself.
Source: AlterNet (US)
Website: http://www.alternet.org/
Filed under: Hemp&Law, HempTherapy, hemp in general | Tags: California, cannabis, ganja, hashish, hemp, Larry Brown, marijuana, pot, prop. 215, skunk, weed
California — When we read the first headlines, we were concerned that California Attorney General Jerry Brown had become part of the campaign to subvert California’s medical marijuana laws by recommending that police go after so-called medical marijuana dispensaries more aggressively. Having read the actual guidelines, however, we believe they are not perfect but potentially useful — at least to state law enforcement people who want to do their job properly rather than seeking to nullify the law.
Our main problem with Brown’s guidelines has to do with his contention, as stated in the summary, that the “guidelines affirm the legality of medical marijuana collectives and cooperatives, but make clear that such entities cannot be operated for profit.” Proposition 215, the initiative approved by voters in 1996, does not ban profit, and that law can only be changed by a vote of the people, not by a legislative enactment or a set of guidelines from the attorney general.
That issue will no doubt be settled through litigation, as have many of the issues that created the circumstances that made it advisable for the attorney general to issue guidelines to clarify the legal climate. California courts have already affirmed, for example, that limits on the number of plants a patient may possess amount to an illegitimate amendment of Prop. 215 and therefore have no legal standing. The stipulation in the attorney general’s guidelines that dispensaries must be nonprofit cooperatives or collectives rather than profit-making enterprises is likely to suffer the same fate.
That quibble aside, Brown’s guidelines are useful and constructive. They make it clear that California law permits patients with a valid recommendation from a physician to possess, use and acquire marijuana, and that dispensaries that keep proper records and exist to serve patients rather than being fronts for illicit drug distribution are also legal. Kris Hermes of the patient advocacy group Americans for Safe Access says he thinks most dispensaries already follow Brown’s guidelines, and some that don’t will require only a few tweaks to be completely legal.
The main problem is that marijuana is still completely prohibited by federal law, and federal agents still have the power to enforce that law. As the U.S. Supreme Court and several lower courts have acknowledged, however, the fact that federal law is still utterly unreasonable has not invalidated California law. State and local officials are duty-bound to enforce state law, not federal law.
Attorney General Brown’s guidelines should make this admittedly sometimes confusing task a little easier. Now it is up to local law enforcement agencies to follow them in good faith and leave federal law enforcement to the feds.
Note: State guidelines for dispensaries are helpful.
Source: Appeal-Democrat (Marysville, CA)
Website: http://www.appeal-democrat.com
Filed under: Hemp&Law, HempTherapy, hemp in general | Tags: California, cannabis, ganja, hashish, hemp, marijuana, medical cannabis, medical marijuana, Oakland, pot, skunk, weed
California — Even as state Attorney General Jerry Brown was preparing to release new medical-marijuana guidelines praised by advocates, his narcotics agents were busting a Southern California dispensary.
Mixed messages? Not necessarily. Both Brown and medical marijuana advocates say the new guidelines issued Monday finally flesh out the state’s notoriously vague 1996 Compassionate Use Act and pose a threat only to illegal drug dealers using the voter-approved medical marijuana law as a smoke screen.
“We’ve always believed that dispensaries should be regulated as opposed to the ‘Wild, Wild West’ situation,” said Americans for Safe Access Chief Counsel Joe Elford, who conferred with the state on these guidelines. “Many, if not most, of the clubs are already in compliance, and I think in the not-so-distant future the vast majority of them will be. They wanted guidelines too, so they’d know what to do to comply with California law.”
The most important part of these guidelines are their recognition that storefront medical marijuana dispensaries can operate legally, Elford said Thursday.
“It’s our view, then, that localities passing outright bans on dispensaries are acting contrary to California law,” he said.
Brown doesn’t necessarily agree.
“I don’t want to go beyond the guidelines,” he said Friday, adding local dispensary bans are “a whole other question that I have to talk to my lawyers about, I don’t want to give an opinion off the top of my head.”
Several Bay Area cities, including Concord, Dublin, El Cerrito, Fremont, Hercules and Livermore, have the sort of dispensary bans of which Elford spoke. Concord Senior Assistant City Attorney Mark Boehme said Friday he hasn’t fully reviewed the guidelines yet — “and that’s all they are: guidelines, they’re not legally binding” — and nobody has contacted the city about challenging the legitimacy of its 2005 dispensary ban.
Elford also said the guidelines send “a clear message to the federal government that dispensaries are here to stay, and “… that they should stop busting dispensaries because we can police are own.”
Fremont City Attorney Harvey Levine said, “Marijuana distribution violates federal law, and last time I looked, it doesn’t get you in trouble to abide by federal law.”
Yet most recent federal raids have targeted dispensaries, which federal authorities claim are criminal enterprises that wouldn’t meet Brown’s new criteria, anyway.
And, asked whether it’s significant that Brown issued the guidelines just a few days after his Bureau of Narcotics Enforcement raided a Northridge marijuana dispensary, Elford replied, “I hope not “… I don’t know about the timing.”
Brown said the only thing to read into the timing is that “we’ve been looking at some of the clinics that are flagrantly violating the law.” The Northridge club was raided as an outgrowth of another, unrelated investigation, he said, but other clubs are under scrutiny.
Many communities remain antagonistic to dispensaries, he noted. “In the Bay Area you don’t feel the same intensity as when you’re talking to people in Riverside and San Bernardino and San Diego and parts of the valley.”
Brown’s 11-page document says a collective dispensary can’t be operated for profit and must have a defined organizational structure including detailed records proving users are legitimate patients with doctors’ recommendations.
“The collective should not purchase marijuana from, or sell to, non-members; instead, it should only provide a means for facilitating or coordinating transactions between members,” the new guidelines say. “The cycle should be a closed circuit of marijuana cultivation and consumption with no purchases or sales to or from non-members. To help prevent diversion of medical marijuana to nonmedical markets, collectives and cooperatives should document each member’s contribution of labor, resources, or money to the enterprise. They also should track and record the source of their marijuana.”
Dispensaries, for example, “that merely require patients to complete a form summarily designating the business owner as their primary caregiver — and then offering marijuana in exchange for cash ‘donations’ — are likely unlawful.” Excessive amounts of marijuana and cash; failure to follow local and state laws applicable to similar businesses, such as licenses and tax payments; weapons; illegal drugs; sales to or purchases from non-members; and distribution outside California are red flags for law enforcement, the guidelines say.
Elford said the “closed circuit” idea aligns with Americans for Safe Access’ interpretation of Senate Bill 420, a 2003 law that tried to flesh out a structure for implementing and obeying the 1996 law. And the guidelines crystallize protections for individuals as well, directing police on when it is and isn’t appropriate to make marijuana arrests of people with state- or local-issued ID cards or doctors’ recommendations,” he said. “We will have a very aggressive campaign to make sure localities comply with the guidelines as well as dispensaries.”
Brown is running for governor in 2010, so this is a good time both to flex some “tough on crime” muscles — the Attorney General’s job, after all — while also mending fences with advocates for a cause still supported by most Californians. But Brown said he was only heeding the call of local law enforcement.
“It clarifies the rules and makes it easier for law enforcement to do their jobs “… and the users and advocates are happy because it re-stated what is permitted by the initiative and the statute,” he said. “It did what law is supposed to do — it set the ground rules for action both by individuals and by the government.”
Source: Oakland Tribune (CA)
Website: http://www.oaklandtribune.com/
Filed under: Hemp&Law, HempTherapy, hemp in general | Tags: California, cannabis, Eureka, ganja, hashish, hemp, marijuana, medical cannabis, medical marijuana, pot, skunk, weed
CA — California Attorney General Jerry Brown passed out an 11-page “road map” for medical marijuana patients recently and hopes everybody will obey the new rules of the road.
After a dozen years of sparring, state and federal authorities, have new guidelines to help legitimate patients avoid arrest. The new directive also spells out how to distinguish legal medical marijuana operations from illegal cultivators and criminal middlemen, which is supposed to make it easier for everyone involved.
Kris Hermes of Americans for Safe Access, a pro-medical marijuana group, told the Los Angeles Times recently that, “This is huge!” Then went on to say, “Hopefully this will send a message to the federal government that California doesn’t intend to deter from the course it has set.”
I hate to be the one to burst bubbles about the feds buying into this latest attempt to get them to be reasonable, but if anyone thinks this will make any difference to them then they must believe in the tooth fairy.
However well intentioned, the truth of the matter is the feds have, and will continue to, tell California lawmakers and voters how things are going to be. They’ll keep right on busting people and California has been helpless to stop them thus far.
When Brown produced his new road map towards tolerance he must have forgotten some things. For starters, the feds go by their own speed limits, and are tools of a failed Drug War against marijuana that seems to have no end in sight.
So far the feds have happily ignored other guidelines and raid wherever, and whenever, they feel like going for a drive. Even though an unlikely coalition of police and medical marijuana activists welcomed the new “road map” don’t expect the feds to stay on the same road with them.
The past has clearly shown the feds contempt for what Californian’s voted for and approved years ago. They ignore our lawmakers, and go after our cities who try to carry out the will of the voters.
I know the new guidelines suggest that people sign up for a state sanctioned medical marijuana card that they can produce when confronted by authorities (spell that feds), but I think that would be a bad idea. How long do you think a list like that would be safe from the feds, who we all know play by their own rules of the road?
The new guidelines are supposed to explain the difference between for-profit operations (the bad guys), and non-profit operations. A laundry list with checkmarks spells out who’s been naughty and who’s been nice for state police, and the feds, to use.
Basically, the premise is that drug cartels are taking over medical marijuana dispensaries, and the new guidelines give the green light to authorities to bust them. As far as I can tell, the authorities have been busting them — and legit operations — for a long time now.
Some medical marijuana activists are really happy to see this move by California’s top law enforcement official, and if reports in the newspapers are true, so are the police. While these two groups are patting themselves on the back the feds are silent about this new tact to keep them on the same road as the rebellious California drivers.
On one hand I’m glad to see the fight continues to give Californian’s what they want, and that a top dog like Brown is willing to wrestle with the big boys from Washington D.C. On the other hand, it doesn’t take much imagination to see this latest attempt is just another battle in the war for state’s rights. At what point are the feds going to give up and recognize that their ridiculous war on marijuana is going nowhere, and admit it isn’t a Class One drug? When will they go after the real druggies who use meth, cocaine, heroin, and dozens of other substances that are Class One drugs that really threaten this country?
Where’s the war on meth? Where’s the war on legal prescription drugs being abused by our youth? Where is the war against so-called designer drugs?
There’s no doubt in my mind that there are people “working the system” that shouldn’t be operating cannabis clinics. They do need to be shut down, because they are giving the legit clinics a bad name. And, I want to think this latest attempt at slowing the feds down will work.
The problem is things have to change at the top. The question now is which one of the presidential candidates would honor Californian’s right to medical marijuana?
Personally, I wouldn’t bet on either of them. Maybe someone should ask McCain and Obama how they feel about state’s rights?
As It Stands, since voters approved Prop. 215, the road has been full of potholes!
Dave Stancliff is a columnist for the Times-Standard. He is a former newspaper editor and publisher.
Source: Times-Standard (Eureka, CA)
Website: http://www.times-standard.com/
