ASA CA Weekly Alert 3/20/09
March 22nd, 2009Posted by George Pappas
1. U.S. Attorney General Begins to Formulate Policy on Medical Cannabis Dispensaries
This week, U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder once again made public statements regarding the Obama Administration’s plans to re-prioritize U.S. policy on enforcement in states with medical cannabis laws. In a question and answer session with reporters at the Justice Department, Holder announced that the new policy would focus DEA resources on intervening only in cases where dispensing collectives run afoul of both local and federal laws. Its a statement that has very positive implications, but also opens the door for some concerns.
Both the U.S. Attorney General and the White House have been issuing similar statements since early February, when White House spokesperson Nick Shapiro first responded to DEA raids carried out by Bush Administration holdovers after President Obama’s January 20 inauguration. The raids defied Obama’s campaign promises and prompted wide scale backlash from advocates and communities in California. Shapiro said that the President expected the new DEA Administrator, when chosen, would review the policy with Obama’s positions and campaign promises in mind.
The most recent statements provide some indication that the administration has begun shaping the policy, and come alongside a national spotlight on the federal conflict that has arisen out of the high profile case of the 2007 raid and recent prosecution of former Morro Bay dispensary owner Charles C. Lynch, who will be sentenced on Monday morning in a federal court, and may see a minimum of 5 years in federal prison. Just in the past week, Lynch was featured on ABC’s 20/20 with John Stossel, on a special segment on MSNBC with Al Roker, in a major article run by the Associated Presss, and a full page story in the New York Times.
While the President’s shift in policy will be the most significant progress from the Executive Branch on medical cannabis in at least 4 Presidential Administrations, there is still cause for some concern, mostly related to local enforcement. Some DEA raids, including that of Lynch, were initiated by local law enforcement intent on circumventing state law. For instance, San Luis Obispo County Sheriff Patrick Hedges investigated Charles C. Lynch for over a year, sending undercover agents to prompt Lynch’s employees to violate California law, which they never did. After unsuccessfully encouraging Lynch to break the law, Sheriff Hedges then contacted DEA to come in and raid, despite the facility’s full support from the Morro Bay Mayor, Chamber of Commerce, and other local officials. ASA has documented similar enforcement tactics from law enforcement in Alameda County, San Diego, Riverside County, and other areas. In the end, however, the continued public statements by top officials in the Obama Administration seem to signal a new and refreshing approach to public discourse over medical cannabis. They are speaking about it confidently, as if it is no longer an issue that federal politicians, especially U.S. Presidents, should be scared to address publicly.
2. American Canyon Reiterates Moratorium, Prepares for a Permanent Dispensary Ban
When a citizen approached City Hall for the proper permits to open a medical cannabis dispensing collective this week, the City of American Canyon not only denied the permit, but used it as an opportunity to extend its moratorium on dispensaries for up to another year. The City Council has long been opposed to allowing dispensaries within city limits, and in the debate that ensued at this week’s meeting, there was present a good deal of inaccurate information being cited by City Council members and staff.
Many municipalities that address dispensary regulations sometimes find it difficult to separate fact from fiction. For instance, though the potential applicant for city permits to open the facility was a respected mortgage broker, City Council member Cindy Coffey said she was opposed to the dispensary because she claimed that they are "notorious for not paying sales tax." Aside from the fact that in 2007 medical cannabis dispensaries paid the State of California over $100 million in sales tax, because she based her opinion on rumors and unfounded assumptions, Councilwoman Coffey essentially accused the applicant of being an underhanded criminal and of trying to scam the state out of money, simply out of the applicants desire to open a legal collective and provide medical cannabis to those who need it in her community.
In addition, the City Attorney along with the Community Development Director co-wrote a memorandum to the city in which they claim that state and federal laws are in conflict with one another. This is contrary to published dispensing collective guidelines from the California Attorney General, which affirmed their legality, and despite multiple rulings both in the U.S. Supreme Court and the California courts which affirm that no such conflict exists. The city is preparing to draft a permanent ban on dispensaries, and community members in American Canyon should be aware that opportunities to fight the potential ban in the City Council will be here.
3. San Mateo, Sonoma Move to Regulate Access
At the Sonoma Planning Commission meeting this week, city planners presented a report on regulating medical cannabis dispensaries. The document highlighted possible regulations that would limit the THC content in concentrates, restrict the number of patients allowed for a dispensary, and determine the municipal structure for reviewing applications and granting permits, among other restrictions.
At the meeting John Sugg, who has operated a medical cannabis dispensing collective in Santa Rosa for four years, voiced his concern about placing the Sheriff in charge of the program. "Most of the ordinance is strong and necessary," he said. "But I have a concern with putting the police chief in charge of managing applications and granting permits. It makes more sense to have that be the city manager."
Sugg’s collective, the Sonoma Patient Group, organized last summer as an unincorporated non-profit collective. Jewel Mathieson, wife of Sonoma Mayor Ken Brown, is an employee and member. She addressed the commission, saying, "Members must be able to get their medication. We should stop the regulations on medicine and stop ignoring the desperate alcohol problem in the valley."
Sugg submitted his own ordinance recommendations to the Commission, prompting them to table the issue to their next regular meeting on April 9, at which they are expected to submit final recommendations to the city council.
Also – on Monday, the San Mateo City Council unanimously voted to introduce an ordinance that would regulate medical cannabis collectives. The council will vote on the ordinance again at its next meeting, and if approved, it will go into effect 30 days later.
Under the proposed ordinance, collectives must register with the city and obtain a license from the police department, with all members providing their names, addresses and phone numbers. The ordinance allows for indoor growth only, and requires that adequate security be provided. San Mateo residents who grow medical cannabis at home for their own use, or for other people living at the house, would not be subject to the rules.
Kris Hermes of Americans for Safe Access noted that registration requirements could be problematic. "It is a function of self-incrimination to offer up your details pertaining to cultivation since it’s still illegal under federal law and local law enforcement has used information on patients to go to the federal government," he said. "They’re setting up, unfortunately, a situation where people will refuse to register and automatically become illegal as a result."
San Mateo residents are encouraged to contact City Council members to request the proposed ordinance, and weigh in with their thoughts before the next meeting.
