LA advocates submit 70,000 initiative signatures
December 11th, 2012Posted by Don Duncan
A coalition of medical cannabis patients, providers, and organized labor submitted 70,000 signatures on Friday to qualify a voter initiative for the May ballot in Los Angeles. The Committee to Protect Patients and Neighborhoods (CPPN), which includes Americans for Safe Access (ASA), developed the voter initiative to establish sensible regulations for medical cannabis patients’ cooperatives and collectives in the city. The proposal would limit the number of facilities in the city to those that meet certain criteria – opening date, proximity to sensitive uses, hours of operation, etc.
Advocates are turning to the voter initiative process in Los Angeles because they are increasingly frustrated with the City Council’s progress on long-standing promises to protect access for patients. The City Council spent years creating an adopting a flawed ordinance in 2010, but numerous lawsuits (by patients’ associations and the city) rendered the measure unenforceable. After settlement talks with the City Attorney collapsed earlier this year, Councilmember Huizar introduced and quickly passed an ordinance that effectively banned all cooperatives and collectives in the city. CPPN mounted a successful voter referendum to force the repeal of the ban, but the city still has no regulations for medical cannabis.
Research conducted by ASA proves that sensible regulations reduce crime and complaints, while preserving safe access for patients. It is past time for California’s largest city to enjoy the benefits of reasonable regulations. The City Council still has time to adopt a regulatory ordinance before the vote in May. A compromise ordinance, which would allow a small number of facilities in the city, was approved by the City Planning Commission last month. It is unclear if City Council Members are willing to approve it, and advocates want to be sure the voters are poised to act if the Council does not.
A separate medical cannabis voter initiative is in the signature gathering phase right now. It is possible that the City Council will be debating the compromise ordinance while advocates are gearing up to campaign for two separate measures. If either measure is approved, it will replace the city’s ordinance. If voters approve both measures, the initiative with the highest number of votes will prevail.
Stay tuned for an eventful winter and spring in LA!
December 11th, 2012 at 12:30 pm
Wow!! Way to go L.A.!! That’s almost 3 times as many signatures that are needed to mandate an offical response, to any question, from the W.H.
January 13th, 2013 at 5:40 pm
Here in Los Angeles we have two voters initiatives that have both recieved enough signatures to get on the ballot for May. I have issues with both initiatives and I will state some of them here.
My issue with the first initiative is the i…ntention of the authors. Which is to monopolize medical marijuana in the city of Los Angeles. They are supported by the UFCW 770, who should be about people getting jobs, yet they want to put thousands of people out of work. That just doesn’t make sense.
The initiative also would make is illegal for anyone on parole or probation for sale of a controlled substance to work in the industry. Not violent crimes, or pedophiles, but the people who were arrested for the very thing these people are asking for immunity from for doing. The head of GLACA, Yami, who really is just one of Don Duncan’s pawns, has had her collective about 250 feet from a school since 2006. That’s why they give themselves 300 days to move once the initiative gets voted in. The initiative is written to protect a select few. The interesting part is the fact they now leave out the need for the original owner to be involved with the collective. That way Montell will be OK to own them all.
Now with the second initiative, sponsered by David Welch, the lawyer who represents hundreds of collectives without any insurance, I almost had a stroke when I read it. It actually states that all collectives must be authorized by state and FEDERAL law. Yup, it says, FEDERAL law. Not once, not twice, but several times.
It also gives full power back to the city council to ammend the ordnance by a majority vote. Now I don’t know any other voters initiative that has sought to take the power away from the legislature only to hand it right back to them on a platter. It goes against the point of a voters initiatve. Just read section 5 of the initiative, the last paragraph, which most never bother reading. It clearly states what I claim.
Both initiatives are self serving, one serving the interests of the small group of owners, the other serving the devious nature of David Welch’s plan to do the dirty work of the city attorney and feds. If they wanted to really make a difference they would have decriminalized marijuana in this city and taken a step forward like washington and Colorado have done, not create more of an impedement to freeing the most useful plant on the earth. The most benign and benevolent plant to ever occur who’s only dander is it’s prohibition. Both of these seek more prohibitions through what they say are better rules for the “patients” and “communities”, when they should just admit they are playing Milton Bradley games and trying to get the get out of jail free card and Boardwalk and park Place. I am not going to sit by quietlly and let such happen, what about you?
Patrick Duff